^(y^^^"^^' 


.e^e^e<^30^^®^^J 


I  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY.  I 

|\     PrineetoD,  N-  J-  \1 


Dewey,  Orville,  1794-1882. 
Works  . . 


(^^LBA.  cd^^^ 


WORKS 


OF 


ORVILLE  DEWEY,  D.D 


VOL.  III. 


DISCOURSES  AND  REVIEWS 


UPON  QUESTIONS 


CONTROVERSIAL  THEOLOGY 


PRACTICAL    RELIGION 


t 


Y 

ORVILLE 'DEWEY,   D.D. 

PASTOB   OB"  THE   CHURCH   OF  THE  MESSIAH  IN   NEW-YORK. 


NEW-YORK: 
C.   S.   FRANCIS    &   CO.   252   BROADWAY. 

BOSTON! 
J.  H.   FRANCIS,  128   WASHIxVGTON   STREET. 

1846. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1846, 

BY    C.    S.   FRANCIS    &   CO. 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  Yo«% 


PRINTED  By 

MUNROE  AND  FRANCIS, 

BOSTON. 


PREFACE. 


The  Volume,  here  offered  to  the  public,  is  designed 
to  give  a  comprehensive  reply  to  the  question.  What  is 
Unitarianism  ?  Many  persons  feel  the  want  of  some- 
thing of  this  nature ;  something  beyond  the  brief  com- 
pass of  a  Tract,  and  within  the  limits  of  a  Yolume, 
which  they  could  give  or  point  out,  to  those  who  are 
asking,  "What  are  your  general  views  of  religion? 
What  are  your  views  of  the  Scriptures,  of  faith  in 
them,  and  of  the  doctrines  and  principles  which  they 
teach  ?"  Such  inquirers  are  often  not  sufficiently 
interested  to  gather  the  information  they  seek,  from 
scattered  tracts,  or  to  hunt  for  it  through  twenty 
volumes ;  nor,  if  they  were,  is  it  likely  that  the  tracts 
or  volumes  would  be  within  their  reach.  The  present 
volume  will  perhaps  satisfy  the  questions,  that  are 
already  in  their  minds ;  and  if  it  raises  questions 
which  it  does  not  settle,  they  must  be  referred  to  other 
sources.  In  particular,  reference  may  be  made,  on 
the  Trinity,  to  Norton's  Statement  of  Reasons ;  on  the 
Offices  of  Christ,  to  Ware's  Discourses  ;  on  the  general 
subject,  to  Sparks's  Inquiry,  Yates's  Vindication,  Pea- 
body's  and  Burnap's  Lectures,  and  the  Works  of  Chan- 
ning  ;  and  for  our  practical  views  of  religion,  to  the 
Discourses  of  Freeman,  Buckminster,  Thatcher,  Abbot, 
Parker,  Cappe  and  Channing,  besides  those  of  many 
living  writers. 
1* 


VI  P  R  E  F  A  C  C  . 

One  word  further  the  Author  may  be  permitted  to 
say  of  the  manner  in  which  this  volume  is  made  up. 
It  consists  partly  of  discourses  not  before  published, 
and  partly  of  reprints  of  former  publications.  Of  the 
latter  kind  are  chiefly  two  series  of  papers,  entitled 
"  Cursory  Observations  on  the  Questions  at  issue  be- 
tween Orthodox  and  Liberal  Christians  ;"  and  "  The 
Analogy  of  Religion  with  other  subjects." 

In  short,  the  Author's  purpose,  in  this  volume,  has 
been,  in  the  first  place,  to  offer  a  very  brief  summary 
of  the  Unitarian  Belief;  in  the  next  place,  to  lay  down 
the  essential  principles  of  all  religious  faith  ;  thirdly, 
to  state  and  defend  our  construction,  as  it  is  generally 
held  among  us,  of  the  Christian  doctrines  ;  fourthly, 
to  illustrate,  by  analogy,  our  views  of  practical  reli- 
gion ;  and  finally,  to  present,  somewhat  at  large,  the 
general  views  entertained  among  us,  of  the  Scriptures ; 
of  the  grounds  of  behef  in  them  ;  of  the  nature  of  their 
Inspiration ;  of  the  New  Testament  doctrine  of  Justi- 
fication by  Faith  ;  and  of  the  just  Principles  of  Rea- 
soning in  religious  inquiry.  Under  the  last  head, 
several  Reviews  from  the  Christian  Examiner  are 
introduced  into  the  present  edition,  and  two  Discourses 
not  before  printed.  In  the  last  of  them,  bearing  the 
title  "  That  Errors  in  Theology  have  sprung  from 
False  Principles  of  Reasoning,"  the  Author  has  at- 
tempted to  show,  as  far  as  was  compatible  with  the 
nature  and  limits  of  a  popular  Discourse,  that  the  pre- 
vailing Theology  is  at  war  with  the  true  inductive 
philosophy. 

With  this  brief  statement,  the  volume  is  submitted 
to  the  Reader. 

New-York,  June,  IS  16. 


X 


CONTENTS 


FAGB 

The  Unitarian  Belief,      -        -        -         -         3 

On  the  Naturk  of  Religious  Belief  ;    with  ixfer- 
ENCEs   concern-ixg    Doubt,    DECISION,    Confidence, 

AND    THE    TRIAL   OF    FaiTH,  -  -  -  -         27 

Cursory  Observations   on  the   Questions   at  issue 
BETWEEN  Orthodox  and  Liberal  Christians. 

I.  Ou  Jhe  Trinity,      .....                        -  57 

II.  On  the  Atonemeat,       .--.--  72 

III.  On  the  Five  Points  of  Calvinism,                          •            -            -  90 

IV.  On  Future  Punishment,            .....  105 
V.  Conclusion.    The  modes  of  Attack  upon  Liberal  Christianity, 

the  same  that  were  used  against  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostles 

and  Reformers,  .  -  .  .  118 


Discourses  and  Reviews. 

The    Analogy    of    Religion    with   other    subjects 
considered. 

I.     The  Analogy  of  Religion,  ...  -  -        137 

11.     On  Conversion,  ...  .  -  154 

III.    On  the  method  of  obtaining  and  exhibiting  Religious  and  Vir- 
tuous Affections,  ......        170 

rV.     Causes  of  Indiflference  and  Aversion  to  Religion,  -  183 

On  the  Original  use  of  the  Epistles  of  the  New 
Testament  compared  with  their  use  and  appli- 
cation AT   the   present   DAY,  _  -  .  -      200 

On  Miracles,                232 

The    Scriptures    considered    as    the    Record   of    a 

Revelation,          -          -          -          -          -          -       v   -  259 

On  the  Nature  and  Extent  of  Inspiration,  276 

On  Faith,  and  Justification  by  Faith,  -  318 
That  Errors  in  Theology  have  sprung  from  False 

Principles  of  Reasoning,                ...          -  333 

On  the  Calvinistic  Views  of  Moral  Philosophy,  365 


THE   UNITARIAN  BELIEF. 


% 


THE  UNITARIAN  BELIEF. 

We  shall  undertake  to  state  in  this  article  what  we 
understand  to  be  the  prevailing  belief  of  Unitarian 
Christians.  Our  position  as  a  religious  body  seems 
still  to  require  statements  of  this  nature.  It  is  a  posi- 
tion, that  is  to  say,  entirely  misunderstood.  Miscon- 
structions, once  in  vogue,  seem  to  have  a  strange 
power  of  perpetuating  themselves ;  or.  at  any  rate, 
they  are  helped  on  by  powers  that  seem  to  us  very 
strange.  In  the  face  of  a  thousand  denials,  and  in 
spite  of  the  self-contradicting  absurdity  of  the  charge, 
it  is  still  said,  and,  by  multitudes,  seems  to  be  thought, 
that  our  creed  consists  of  negations ;  that  we  believe 
in  almost  nothing.  It  seems  to  be  received  as  if  it 
were  a  matter  of  common  consent,  that  we  do  not 
hold  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  and  that  we  scarce- 
ly pretend  to  hold  to  the  Bible  itself.  It  is  apparently 
supposed  by  many,  that  we  stand  upon  peculiar  ground 
in  this  respect ;  that  we  hold  some  strange  position  in 
J;he  Christian  world,  different  from  all  other  Christian 
denominations. 

We  must,  therefore,  if  our  patience  fail  not,  explain 
ourselves  again  and  again.  We  must,  again  and 
again,  implore  others  to  make  distinctions  very  obvi- 
ous indeed,  but  which  they  are  strangely  slow  to  see ; 
to  distinguish,  that  is  to  say,  or  at  least  to  remember 
that  loe  distinguish,  between  the  Bible  and  fallible 
interpretations,  between  Scripture  doctrines  and  the 


4  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

explanation  of  those  doctrines.  The  foniier  we  re- 
ceive ;  the  latter  only  do  we  reject. 

Our  position  in  the  Christian  world  is  not  a  singular 
one.  We  profess  to  stand  upon  the  same  ground  as  all 
other  Christians,  the  Bible.  Our  position,  considered 
as  dissent ;  our  position,  as  assailed  on  all  sides,  is  by 
no  means  a  novel  one.  The  Protestants  were,  and 
are,  charged  by  the  Romish  Church  with  rejecting 
Christianity.  Every  sect  in  succession  that  has  broken 
off  from  the  body  of  Christians,  the  Lutherans  and 
English  Episcopalians  first,  then  the  Scotch  Presbyte- 
rians, then  the  Baptists,  the  Methodists,  the  (Quakers, 
the  Puritans,  the  Independents  of  every  name,  have 
been  obliged  to  reply  to  the  same  charge  of  holding  no 
valid  nor  authorized  belief.  And  Avhat  has  been  the 
answer  of  them  all  ?  It  has  been  the  answer  of  Paul 
before  Felix ;  that  they  did  believe ;  that  they  "  be- 
lieved all  things  that  are  written  "  in  the  holy  volume. 

This  same  defence,  namely,  Paul's  defence  to  the 
Jews,  Luther's  and  Wickliffe's  to  the  Romish  Church ; 
the  defence  of  Knox,  of  Robinson,  of  Fox,  of  Wesley, 
and  Whitfield,  and  of  our  own  Mayhew  and  Mathers 
to  the  English  Church  ;  this  same  defence,  it  has  fallen 
to  our  lot  to  plead  as  Unitarian  Christians.  We  bear 
a  new  name  ;  but  we  take  an  old  stand  ;  a  stand  old 
as  Christianity.  We  bear  a  new  name,  but  we  make 
an  old  defence  ;  we  think  as  every  other  class  of  Chris- 
tians have  thought,  that  we  approach  the  nearest  to 
the  old  primitive  Christianity.  We  bear  a  hard  name, 
the  name  of  heretics  ;  but  it  is  the  very  name  which 
Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  Arminians,  Calvinists, 
have  once  borne  ;  which  all  Protestant  Orthodoxy  has 
once  borne ;  which  Paul  himself  bore,  when  he  said, 
"  After  the  way  which  they  call  heresy,  so  worship  I 
the  God  of  my  fathers."     We  bear  a  new  name  ;  and 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  5 

a  new  name  draws  suspicion  upon  it,  as  every  Chris- 
tian sect  has  had  occasion  full  well  to  know  ;  and  we 
think,  therefore,  that  our  position  and  our  plea  demand 
some  consideration  and  sympathy  from  the  body  of 
Christians.  We  think  that  they  ought  to  listen  to  us, 
when  we  make  the  plea,  once  their  own,  that  we  be- 
lieve, according  to  our  honest  understanding  of  their 
claim  upon  our  faith,  all  things  that  are  written  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

There  is  one  circumstance  which  makes  the  state- 
ment of  this  defence  peculiarly  pertinent  and  proper 
for  us.  And  that  is,  the  delicacy  which  has  been  felt 
by  our  writers  and  preachers  about  the  use  of  terms. 
When  we  found,  for  instance,  that  the  phrase,  '•  Fa- 
ther, Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,"  and  that  the  words,  atone- 
ment^ regeneration,  election,  with  some  others,  were 
appropriated  by  the  popular  creeds,  and  stood  in  pre- 
vailing usage,  for  orthodox  doctrines,  we  hesitated 
about  the  free  use  of  them.  It  was  not  because  we 
hesitated  about  the  meaning  which  Scripture  gave  to 
them,  but  about  the  meaning  which  common  usage 
had  fixed  upon  them.  We  believed  in  the  things 
themselves  ;  we  believed  in  the  words  as  they  stood  in 
the  Bible  ;  but  not  as  they  stood  in  other  books.  But 
finding  that,  whenever  we  used  these  terms,  we  were 
charged,  as  even  our  great  Master  himself  was,  with 
"deceiving  the  people,"  and  not  anxious  to  dispute 
about  words,  we  gave  up  the  familiar  use  of  a  portion 
of  the  Scriptural  phraseology.  Whether  we  ought,  in 
justice  to  ourselves,  so  to  have  done,  is  not  now  the 
question.  We  did  so  ;  and  the  consequence  has  been, 
that  the  body  of  the  people,  not  often  hearing  from  our 
pulpits  the  contested  words  and  phrases  ;  not  often 
hearing  the  words,  propitiation,  sacrifice,  the  natural 
man,  the  new  birth,  and  the  Spirit  of  God,  hold  them- 
2* 


6  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

selves  doubly  warranted  in  charging  us  with  a  defec- 
tion from  the  faith  of  Scripture.  It  is  this  state  of 
things,  which  makes  it  especially  pertinent  and  proper 
for  us,  as  we  have  said,  distinctly  to  declare  not  only 
our  belief  in  the  Scriptures  generally,  but  our  belief  in 
what  the  Scriptures  teach  on  the  points  in  controver- 
sy ;  our  belief,  we  repeat,  in  what  the  Scriptures  mean 
by  the  phrase,  "  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,"  and  by 
the  words,  atonement^  conversion,  election^  and  others 
that  stand  for  disputed  doctrines. 

To  some  statements  of  this  nature,  then,  we  now 
invite  attention  ;  only  premising  further,  that  it  is  no 
part  of  our  purpose,  within  the  brief  limits  of  this  ex- 
position, to  set  forth  anything  of  that  abundant  argu- 
ment for  our  views  of  Christianity,  which  so  powerfully 
convinces  us  that  they  are  true.  Our  object  at  present 
is  limited  to  statement  and  explanation.  We  would 
present  the  Unitarian  creed,  according  to  our  own  un- 
derstanding of  it. 

With  this  object  in  view,  we  say,  in  general,  that 
we  believe  in  the  Scriptures. 

On  a  point  which  is  so  plain,  and  ought  to  be  so 
well  understood  as  this,  it  is  unnecessary  to  dwell, 
unless  it  be  for  the  purpose  of  discrimination.  If  any 
one  thinks  it  necessary  to  a  reception  of  the  Bible  as  a 
revelation  from  God,  that  the  inspired  penmen  should 
have  written  by  immediate  dictation  ;  if  he  thinks  that 
the  writers  were  mere  amanuenses,  and  that  w^ord 
after  word  was  put  down  by  instant  suggestion  from 
above  ;  that  the  very  style  is  divine  and  not  human  ; 
that  the  style,  we  say,  and  the  matters  of  style,  the 
figures,  the  metaphors,  the  illustrations,  came  from 
the  Divine  mind,  and  not  from  human  minds ;  we 
say,  at  once  and  plainly,  that  we  do  not  regard  the 
Scriptures  as  setting  forth  any  claims  to  such  super- 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  7 

natural  perfection  or  accuracy  of  style.  It  is  not  a 
kind  of  distinction,  that  would  add  anything  to  the 
authority,  much  less  to  the  dignity,  of  a  communication 
from  heaven.  Nay,  it  would  detract  from  its  power, 
to  deprive  it,  by  any  hypothesis,  of  those  touches  of 
nature,  of  that  natural  pathos,  simplicity  and  imagin- 
ation, and  of  that  solemn  grandeur  of  thought  disre- 
garding style,  of  which  the  Bible  is  full.  Enough  is  it 
for  us,  that  the  matter  is  divine,  the  doctrines  true, 
the  history  authentic,  the  miracles  real,  the  promises 
glorious,  the  threatenings  fearful.  Enough,  that  all 
is  gloriously  and  fearfully  true ;  true  to  the  Divine 
will,  true  to  human  nature,  true  to  its  wants,  anxieties, 
sorrows,  sins  and  solemn  destinies.  Enough,  that  the 
seal  of  a  divine  and  miraculous  communication  is  set 
upon  that  Holy  Book. 

So  we  receive  it.  So  we  believe  in  it.  And  there  is 
many  a  record  on  those  inspired  pages,  which  he  who 
believes  therein  would  not  exchange ;  no,  he  would 
not  exchange  it,  a  simple  sentence  though  it  be,  for 
the  wealth  of  worlds. 

That  God  Almighty,  the  Infinite  Creator  and  Father, 
hath  spoken  to  the  world  ;  that  He  who  speaks  indeed, 
in  all  the  voices  of  nature  and  life,  but  speaks  there 
generally  and  leaves  all  to  inference ;  that  he  hath 
spoken  to  man  distinctly,  and  as  it  were  individually — • 
spoken  with  a  voice  of  interpretation  for  life's  myste- 
ries, and  of  guidance  amidst  its  errors,  and  of  comfort 
for  its  sorrows,  and  of  pardon  for  its  sins,  and  of  hope, 
undying  hope,  beyond  the  grave ;  this  is  a  fact,  compared 
with  which  all  other  facts  are  not  worth  believing  in ; 
this  is  an  event,  so  interesting,  so  transcendent,  trans- 
porting, sublime,  as  to  leave  to  all  other  events  the 
character  only  of  things  ordinary  and  indifferent. 

But  let  us  pass  from  the  general  truth  of  this  record 


8  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

to  some  of  its  particular  doctrines.  Our  attention  here 
will  be  confined  to  the  New  Testament. 

I.  And  we  say,  in  the  first  place,  that  we  believe  '•  in 
the  Father,  and  in  the  Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost." 
This  was  the  simple  primitive  creed  of  the  Christians  ; 
and  it  were  well  if  men  had  been  content  to  receive  it 
in  its  simplicity.  As  a  creed,  it  was  directed  to  be  in- 
troduced into  the  form  of  baptism.  The  rite  of  bap- 
tism was  appropriated  to  the  profession  of  Christianity. 
The  converts  were  to  be  baptized  into  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  Christian  religion ;  "  baptized  into  the 
name,"  that  Is,  into  the  acknowledgment,  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,    and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

This  creed  consists  of  three  parts.  It  contains  no 
proof,  nor  hint,  of  the  doctrine  of  a  Trinity.  We 
might  as  well  say,  that  any  other  three  points  of 
behef  are  one  point.  The  creed  consists  of  three  parts  ; 
and  these  parts  embrace  the  grand  peculiarities  of  the 
Christian  religion;  and  it  is  for  this  reason,  as  we 
conceive,  and  for  no  other,  that  they  are  introduced 
into  the  primitive  form  of  a  profession  of  Christianity. 

The  first  tenet  is,  that  God  is  a  paternal  Being; 
that  he  has  an  interest  in  his  creatures,  such  as  is 
expressed  in  the  title  Father  ;  an  interest  unknown  to 
all  the  systems  of  Paganism,  untaught  in  all  the  theo- 
ries of  philosophy  ;  an  interest  not  only  in  the  glorious 
beings  of  other  spheres,  the  sons  of  light,  the  dwellers 
in  heavenly  worlds,  but  in  us,  poor,  ignorant  and  un- 
worthy as  we  are;  that  he  has  pity  for  the  erring, 
pardon  for  the  guilty,  love  for  the  pure,  kindness  for 
the  humble  and  promises  of  immortal  and  blessed  life 
for  those  who  trust  and  obey  him.  God,  yes,  the  God 
of  boundless  worlds  and  infinite  systems,  is  our  Father. 
How  many,  in  Christian  lands,  have  not  yet  learned 
this  first  truth  of  the  Christian  faith ! 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  9 

The  second  article  in  the  Christian's  creed  is,  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  "  the  brightness  of  his 
glory,  and  the  express  image  of  his  person ;"  not  God 
himself,  but  his  image,  his  brightest  manifestation ; 
the  teacher  of  his  truth,  the  messenger  of  his  will ;  the 
mediator  between  God  and  men ;  the  sacrifice  for  sin, 
and  the  Saviour  from  it ;  the  conqueror  of  death,  the 
forerunner  into  eternity,  where  he  evermore  liveth  to 
make  intercession  for  us.  We  are  not  about  to  argue  ; 
but  we  cannot  help  remarking,  as  Ave  pass,  how  obvious 
it  is,  that  in  none  of  these  offices  can  Jesus  be  regarded 
as  God.  If  he  is  God  in  his  nature,  yet  as  Mediator 
between  God  and  man,  we  say  he  cannot  be  regarded 
as  God. 

The  third  object  of  our  belief,  introduced  into  the 
primitive  creed,  is  the  Holy  Ghost ;  in  other  words, 
that  power  of  God,  that  divine  influence,  by  which 
Christianity  was  established  through  miraculous  aids, 
and  by  which  its  spirit  is  still  shed  abroad  in  the  hearts 
of  men.  This  tenet,  as  we  understand  it,  requires 
our  belief  in  miracles,  and  in  gracious  interpositions 
of  God,  for  the  support  and  triumph  of  Christian  faith 
and  virtue. 

Let  us  add,  that  these  three,  with  the  addition  of 
the  doctrine  of  a  future  life,  are  the  grand  points  of 
faith  which  are  set  forth  in  the  earliest  uninspired 
^creed  on  record ;  commonly  called  "  The  Apostles' 
Creed."  Its  language  is,  "  I  believe  in  God  the  Father 
Almighty ;  and  in  Jesus  Christ,  his  only-begotten  Son, 
our  Lord ;  who  was  born  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  Vir- 
gin Mary;  and  was  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate, 
and  was  buried ;  and,  the  third  day,  rose  again  from 
the  dead,  ascended  into  heaven,  sitteth  on  the  right 
hand  of  the  Father;  whence  he  shall  come  to  judge 
the  quick  and  the  dead  ;  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost ;  the 


10  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

Holy  Church;  the  remission  of  sins;  and  the  resur- 
rection of  the  flesh."  Not  a  word  is  here  of  "co-equal 
Son,"  as  in  the  Nicene  Creed ;  not  a  word  of  "  Trin- 
ity," as  in  the  Athanasian.  Things  approach  nearer, 
it  should  seem,  to  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel,  as  they 
approach  nearer  to  its  date.  To  that  simplicity  of 
faith,  then,  we  hold  fast.  On  that  primitive  and  beau- 
tiful record  of  doctrine  we  put  our  hand  and  place  our 
reliance.  We  believe  "  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Son, 
and  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  May  the  Father  Almighty 
have  mercy  upon  us !  May  the  Son  of  God  redeem 
us  from  guilt,  from  misery,  and  from  hell !  May  the 
Holy  Ghost  sanctify  and  save  us ! 

From  this  general  creed,  let  us  now  proceed  to  par- 
ticular doctrines. 

11.  We  belie-ve  in  the  atonement.  That  is  to  say, 
we  believe  in  what  that  word,  and  similar  words  mean, 
in  the  New  Testament.  We  take  not  the  responsi- 
bility of  supporting  the  popular  interpretations.  They 
are  various,  and  are  constantly  varying,  and  are  with- 
out authority,  as  much  as  they  are  withovit  uniformity 
and  consistency.  What  the  divine  record  says,  we 
believe  according  to  the  best  understanding  we  can 
form  of  its  import.  We  believe  that  Jesus  Christ 
"died  for  our  sins  ;"  that  he  "  died,  the  just  for  the  un- 
just ;"  that  "  he  gave  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  f 
that  "he  is  the  Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the 
sins  of  the  world  ;"  that  "  we  have  redemption  through 
his  blood ;"  that  we  "  have  access  to  God.  and  enter 
into  the  holiest,  that  is,  the  nearest  communion  with 
God,  by  the  blood  of  Jesus."  We  have  no  objection 
to  the  phrase  "  atoning  blood,"  though  it  is  not  Scrip- 
tural, provided  it  is  taken  in  a  sense  which  the  Scrip- 
ture authorizes. 

But  what  now  is  the  meaning  of  all  this  phraseology, 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  11 

and  of  much  more  that  is  hke  it  ?     Certainly  it  is,  that 
there  is  some  connexion  between  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  and  our  forgiveness,  our  redemption  from  sin 
and  misery.     This  we  all  believe.     But  what  is  this 
connexion  ?     Here  is  all  the  difficulty  ;  here  is  all  the 
difference  of  opinion.     We  all  believe,  all  Christians 
believe,  that  the  death  of  Christ  is  a  means  of  our  sal- 
vation.    But  how  is  it  a  means  ?     Was  it,  some  one 
will  say,  perhaps,  as  if  he  were  putting  us  to  the  test ; 
was  it  an  atonement,  a  sacrifice,  a  propitiation  ?     We 
answer,  that  it  was  an  atonement,  a  sacrifice,  a  propi- 
tiation.    But  now  the  question  is,  what  is  an  atone- 
ment, a  sacrifice,  a  propitiation  ?     And  this  is  the  dif- 
ficult question ;  a  question,  to  the  proper  solution  of 
w^hich  much  thought,  much  cautious  discrimination, 
much  criticism,  much  knowledge  and  especially  of  the 
ancient  Hebrew  sacrifices,  is  necessary.     Can  we  not 
"  receive  the  atonement,"  without  this  knowledge,  this 
criticism,  this  deep  philosophy  ?     What  then  is  to  be- 
come of  the  mass  of  mankind,  of  the  body  of  Chris- 
tians ?     Can  we  not  savingly  '•  receive  the  atonement," 
vmless  we  adopt  some  particular  explanation,  some 
peculiar  creed,  concerning  it  ?     T\Tio  will  dare  to  an- 
sAver  this  question  in  the  negative,  when  he  knows  that 
the  Christian  world,  the  Orthodox  Christian  world,  is 
filled  with  differences  of  opinion  concerning  it  ?     The 
Presbyterian  Church  of  America  is,  at  this  moment, 
rent  asunder  on  this  question.     Christians  are,  every- 
where, divided  on  the  questions,  whether  the  redemption 
is  particular  or  general;    whether  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  were  a  literal  endurance  of  the  punishment  due 
to  sin,  or  only  a  moral  equivalent ;  and  whether  this 
equivalency,  supposing  this  to  be  the  true  explanation, 
consists  in  the  endurance  of  God's  displeasure  against 
sin,  or  only  in  a  simple  manifestation  of  it. 


12  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

The  atonement  is  one  thing  ;  the  gracious  interposi- 
tion of  Christ  in  our  behalf;  the  doing  of  all  that  was 
necessary  to  be  done,  to  provide  the  means  and  the 
way  for  our  salvation — this  is  one  thing ;  in  this  we 
all  believe.  The  philosophy,  the  theory,  the  theology 
of  the  atonement,  is  another  thing.  About  this.  Ortho- 
dox Christians  are  differing  with  one  another,  about  as 
much  as  they  are  differing  from  us.  Nay  more,  they 
are  saying  as  hard  things  of  one  another  as  they  ever 
said  of  us.  Is  it  not  time  to  learn  wisdom  ?  Is  there 
not  good  reason  for  taking  the  ground  we  do ;  the 
ground,  that  is  to  say,  of  general  belief  and  trust,  with- 
out insisting  upon  particular  and  peculiar  explanations  ? 

We  believe  in  Christ ;  and  well  were  it  if  we  all  be- 
lieved in  him  too  fervently  and  tenderly  to  be  engaged 
much  in  theological  disputes  and  denunciations.  We 
believe  in  Christ.  We  pray  to  God  through  him.  We 
ask  God  to  bless  us  for  his  sake  ;  for  we  feel  that  Christ 
makes  intercession,  and  has  obtained  the  privilege  to  be 
heard,  through  his  own  meritorious  sufferings.  Christ's 
sacrifice  is  the  grandest,  the  most  powerful  means  of 
salvation.  It  was  a  transcendent  and  most  affecting 
example  of  meekness,  patience  and  forgiveness  of  in- 
juries. It  was  a  most  striking  exhibition  of  God's  gra- 
cious interest  and  concern  for  us,  of  his  view  of  the 
evil  and  curse  of  sin,  and  of  his  compassion  for  the 
guilty,  and  of  his  readiness  to  forgive  the  penitent.  It 
was  an  atonement ;  that  is  to  say,  a  means  of  recon- 
ciliation,— reconciliation  not  of  God  to  us,  but  of  us  to 
God.  The  blood  of  that  sacrifice  was  atoning  blood  ; 
that  is,  it  was  blood,  on  which  whoever  looks  rightly, 
is  touched  with  gratitude  and  humility  and  sorrow  for 
his  sins,  and  thus  is  reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of 
his  Son. 

Now  it  is  possible  that  we  do  not  understand  and 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  13 

receive  all  that  is  meant  by  the  Scriptures  on  this  sub- 
ject. We  admit  it,  as  what  imperfection  ought  always 
to  admit ;  but  we  admit  it,  too,  for  the  sake  of  saying', 
that,  so  long  as  we  receive  all  that  we  can  understand 
from  the  language  in  question ;  so  long  as  we  receive 
and  believe  every  word  that  is  written  ;  no  man  has  a 
right  to  say  to  us,  without  qualification,  "  You  do  not 
believe  in  the  atonement."  He  may  say,  "  You  do  not 
believe  in  the  atonement  according  to  my  explanation, 
or  according  to  Calvin's  explanation ;  but  he  has  no 
right  to  say,  without  qualification,  "  You  do  not  believe 
in  the  doctrine,  you  do  not  believe  in  the  propitiation, 
in  the  reconciliation,  in  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus  ;"  no  more 
right,  than  we  have  to  addi'ess  the  same  language  to 
him.* 

*  In  an  Introductory  Essay  to  Butler's  Analogy,  published  by  a 
leading  defender  of  what  is  called  the  New  Divinity  in  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  the  author  says,  "  We  maintain  that  the  System  of 
Unitarians,  which  denies  all  such  substitution," — meaning  the  re- 
moval of  calamities  from  us,  in  ordinary  life,  by  the  interposition 
and  suffering  of  another, — "  is  a  violation  of  all  the  modes  in  which 
God  has  yet  dispensed  his  blessings  to  man  "  We  may  just  observe 
in  passing,  that  the  respectable  author  would  not  say,  on  reflection, 
"  of  all  the  modes;"  for  many  of  the  most  momentous  blessings  are 
dispensed  to  us  through  our  own  agency.  But  this  is  what  he  would 
say,  that  the  Unitarian  belief,  with  regard  to  the  atonement,  vio- 
lates, as  he  conceives,  one  great  principle  of  the  divine  beneficence. 
And  that  is  the  principle,  that  blessings  are  often  conferred  on  us, 
m  the  course  of  Providence,  through  the  instrumentality  of  others, 
of  parents,  friends,  fellow-beings,  &c,  "  It  is  by  years  of  patient 
toil  in  others,"  says  Mr.  Barnes,  in  his  Essay,  "  that  we  possess  the 
elements  of  science,  the  principles  of  morals,  the  endowments  of 
religion."  "•  Over  a  helpless  babe, — ushered  into  the  world,  naked, 
feeble,  speechless,  there  impends  hunger,  cold,  sickness,  sudden 
death, — a  mother's  watchfulness  averts  these  evils.  Over  a  nation 
impend  revolutions,  sword,  famine,  and  the  pestilence.  The  blood 
of  the  patriot  averts  these,  and  the  nation  smiles  in  peace."  It  is 
true  that  the  author  does  "  not  aflBrm  that  this  is  all  that  is  meant 
by  an  atonement,"  and  herein  we  entirely  agree  with  him.     But  he 

2 


14  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

We  believe  then  in  the  atonement.  We  beUeve  in 
other  views  of  this  great  subject,  than  those  which  are 
expressed  by  the  word  atonement.  But  this  word 
spreads  before  our  minds  a  truth  of  inexpressible  inter- 
est.    The  reconciliation  by  Jesus  Christ,  his  interpo- 

certainly  is  mistaken,  when  he  says,  that  Unitarians  deny  all  such 
substitution.  We  deny  the  Calvinistic  explanation  of  atonement  or 
substitution.  We  might  reject  the  author's  hypothesis,  too,  if  we 
knew  what  it  was.  But  does  it  follow,  that  we  deny  all  substitu- 
tion .'     On  the  contrary,  we  especially  hold  to  such  substitution. 

If  all  reputed  belief  in  the  atonement  is  to  depend  on  receiving 
one  particular  explanation  of  it,  where  is  this  to  end  ?  The  party 
in  the  Presbyterian  Church  which  strictly  adheres  to  their  standards, 
that  is,  to  the  genuine  old  Calvinistic  theology,  charges  Mr.  Barnes 
and  his  friends,  and  the  body  of  New  England  Divines,  with  hold- 
ing •'  another  gospel."  These  again  charge  Dr.  Taylor  and  the 
New  Haven  School  with  holding  "  another  gospel."  Meanwhile, 
each  of  these  bodies  very  stoutly  defends  its  position,  insists  upon 
its  adherence  to  Christianity,  and  protests  against  the  sentence  of 
excision.  Has  either  of  these  parties  obtained  a  monopoly  in  pro- 
testation and  profession  .'  Are  liberality  and  candor  to  stop  wuth 
each  party,  just  where  its  convenience  may  dictate  ?  Have  they 
needed  charity  so  much,  that  they  have  used  it  all  up  ?  Is  the  last 
chance  of  a  candid  and  kind  construction  gone  by  ?  and  is  nobody 
ever  to  be  permitted  any  more  to  say,  "  We  believe  in  the  Gospel, 
though  not  according  to  your  explanation  ?" 

There  are,  perhaps,  no  more  accredited  defenders  of  the  popular 
doctrine  of  the  atonement  than  Andrew  Fuller  and  Bishop  Magee. 
Fuller,  as  quoted  by  Evans  in  his  "  Sketch,"  says,  "  If  we  say,  a 
way  was  opened  by  the  death  of  Christ,  for  the  free  and  consistent 
exercise  of  mercy  in  all  the  methods  which  sovereign  wisdom  saw 
fit  to  adopt,  perhaps  we  shall  include  every  material  idea  which  the 
Scriptures  give  us  of  that  important  event." — Evans,  p  120,  14th 
edition. 

To  the  question,  "  In  what  way  can  the  death  of  Christ  be  con- 
ceived to  operate  to  the  remission  of  sins  .'"  Magee  says,  "  The  an- 
swer of  the  Christian  is,  I  know  not,  nor  does  it  concern  me  to 
know,  in  what  manner  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  connected  wath  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  ;  it  is  enough  that  this  is  declared  by  God  to  be 
the  medium  through  which  my  salvation  is  effected." — Magee  on 
the  Atonement,  p.  29,  American  edition. 

With  these  declarations  we  entirely  agree. 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  15 

sition  to  bring  us  nigh  to  God,  is  to  us  his  grandest 
office.  To  our  minds  there  is  no  sentence  of  the  holy 
vokmie,  more  interesting,  more  weighty,  more  pre- 
cious, than  that  passage  in  the  subhme  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  "  Ye  were  strangers  from  the  covenants 
of  promise,  having  no  hope,  and  without  God  in  the 
world ;  but  now  in  Christ  Jesus,  ye,  who  sometime 
were  far  off,  are  brought  nigh  by  the  blood  of  Christ." 
It  is  this  which  the  world  needed ;  it  is  this  which 
every  mind  now  needs,  beyond  all  things ;  to  be 
brought  nigh  to  God.  By  error,  by  superstition  and 
sin,  by  slavish  fears  and  guilty  passions  and  wicked 
ways,  we  were  separated  from  him.  By  a  gracious 
mission  from  the  Father,  by  simple  and  clear  instruc- 
tions, by  encouraging  representations  of  God's  paternal 
love  and  pity,  by  winning  examples  of  the  transcend- 
ent beauty  of  goodness,  and,  most  of  all,  by  that  grand 
consummation,  death,  b)^  that  exhibition  of  the  curse 
of  sin,  in  which  Jesus  was  made  a  curse  for  it,  by  that 
compassion  of  the  Holy  One,  which  flowed  forth  in 
every  bleeding  wound,  b}^  that  voice  for  ever  sounding 
through  the  world,  "  Father  !  Father  !  forgive  them," 
Jesus  has  brought  us  nigh  to  God.  Can  it  be  thought 
enthusiasm  to  say,  that  there  is  no  blessing,  either  in 
possession  or  in  the  range  of  possibility,  to  be  compared 
with  this  ?  Does  not  reason  itself  declare,  that  all  the 
-harmonies  of  moral  existence  are  broken,  if  the  great, 
central,  all-attracting  Power,  be  not  acknowledged  and 
felt  ?  AYithout  God — to  every  mind  that  has  awaked 
to  the  consciousness  of  its  nature — without  God,  life  is 
miserable  ;  the  world  is  dark  ;  the  universe  is  disrobed 
of  its  splendours  ;  the  intellectual  tie  to  nature  is  bro- 
ken ;  the  charm  of  existence  is  dissolved ;  the  great 
hope  of  being  is  lost ;  and  the  mind  itself,  like  a  star 
struck  from  its  sphere,  wanders  through  the  infinite 


16  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

region  of  its  conceptions,  without  attraction,  tendency, 
destiny  or  end.  "  Without  God  in  the  world  !"  what 
a  comprehensive  and  desolating  sentence  of  exclusion 
is  written  in  those  few  words  !  "  Without  God  in  the 
world  !"  It  is  to  be  without  the  presence  of  the  Creator 
amidst  his  works,  of  the  Father  amidst  his  family,  of 
the  Being  who  has  spread  gladness  and  beauty  all 
around  us.  It  is  to  be  without  spiritual  light,  without 
any  sure  guidance  or  strong  reliance,  without  any 
adequate  object  for  our  ever  expanding  love,  without 
any  sufficient  consoler  for  our  deepest  sorrows,  without 
any  protector  when  the  world  joins  against  us,  without 
any  refuge  when  persecution  pursues  to  death,  without 
any  all-controlling  principle,  without  the  chief  sanction 
of  duty,  without  the  great  bond  of  existence.  Oh  ! 
dark  and  fearful  in  spirit  must  we  be,  poor  tremblers 
upon  a  bleak  and  desolate  creation,  deserted,  despair- 
ing, miserable  must  we  be,  if  the  Power  that  controls 
the  universe  is  not  our  friend,  if  God  be  nothing  to  us 
but  a  mighty  and  dread  abstraction  to  which  we  never 
come  near  ;  if  God  be  not  "  our  God,  and  our  exceed- 
ing great  reward  for  ever !"  This  is  the  fearful  doom 
that  is  reserved  in  the  gospel  of  Christ.  This  the  fear- 
ful condition  from  which  it  was  his  great  design  to  de- 
liver us.  For  this  end  it  was  that  he  died,  that  he 
might  bring  us  nigh  to  God.  The  blood  of  martyrdom 
is  precious  ;  but  this  was  the  blood  of  a  holier  sacrifice, 
of  innocence  pleading  for  guilt,  "  of  a  lamb  without 
spot  and  without  blemish,  slain  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world." 

But  we  must  pass  to  other  topics,  an^J  the  space  that 
remains  will  oblige  us  to  give  them  severally  much 
less  expansion  in  this  brief  statement. 

ni.  In  the  third  place,  then,  we  say,  that  we  believe 
in  human  depravity ;  and  a  very  serious  and  sadden 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  17 

ing  belief  it  is,  too,  that  we  hold  on  this  point.  We 
believe  in  the  very  great  depravity  of  mankind,  in  the 
exceeding  depravation  of  human  nature.  We  believe 
that  "  the  heart  is  deceitful  above  all  things,  and  des- 
perately wicked."  We  believe  all  that  is  meant,  when 
it  is  said  of  the  Avorld  in  the  time  of  Noah,  that  "  all 
the  imaginations  of  men,  and  all  the  thoughts  of  their 
hearts  were  evil,  and  only  evil  continually."  We  be- 
lieve all  that  Paul  meant,  when  he  said,  speaking  of 
the  general  character  of  the  heathen  world  in  his  time, 
"  There  is  none  that  is  righteous,  no,  not  one  ;  there  is 
none  that  understandeth,  there  is  none  that  seeketh 
after  God  ;  they  have  all  gone  out  of  the  way,  there  is 
none  that  doeth  good,  or  is  a  doer  of  good,  no,  not  one  ; 
with  their  tongues  they  use  deceit,  and  the  poison  of 
asps  is  under  their  lips  ;  whose  mouth  is  full  of  cursing 
and  bitterness ;  and  the  way  of  peace  have  they  not 
known,  and  there  is  no  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes." 
We  believe  that  this  was  not  intended  to  be  taken 
without  qualifications,  for  Paul,  as  we  shall  soon  have 
occasion  to  observe,  made  qualifications.  It  was  true 
in  the  general.  But  it  is  not  the  ancient  heathen 
world  alone,  that  we  regard  as  filled  with  evil.  We 
believe  that  the  world  now,  taken  in  the  mass,  is  a  very, 
a  very  bad  world ;  that  the  sinfulness  of  the  world  is 
dreadful  and  horrible  to  consider ;  that  the  nations 
T)ught  to  be  covered  with  sackcloth  and  mourning  for 
it ;  that  they  are  filled  with  misery  by  it.  Why,  can 
any  man  look  abroad  upon  the  countless  miseries  in- 
flicted by  selfishness,  dishonesty,  slander,  strife,  war ; 
vipon  the  boundless  woes  of  intemperance,  libertinism, 
gambling,  crime  ;  can  any  man  look  upon  all  this,  with 
the  thousand  minor  diversities  and  shadings  of  guilt 
and  guilty  sorrow,  and  feel  that  he  could  wiite  any 
less  dreadful  sentence  against  the  world  than  Paul  has 


18  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

written  ?  Not  believe  in  human  depravity ;  great, 
general,  dreadful  depravity  !  Why,  a  man  must  be  a 
fool,  nay,  a  s'.ock  or  a  stone,  not  to  believe  in  it !  He 
has  no  eyes,  he  has  no  senses,  he  has  no  perceptions, 
if  he  refuses  to  believe  in  it ! 

But  let  the  reader  of  this  exposition  take  with 
him  these  qualifications ;  for  although  it  is  popular, 
strangely  popular,  to  speak  extravagantly  of  human 
wickedness,  we  shall  not  endeavour  to  gain  any  man's 
good  opinion  by  that  means. 

First,  it  is  not  the  depravity  of  nature^  in  which  we 
believe.  Human  nature,  nature  as  it  exists  in  the 
bosom  of  an  infant,  is  nothing  else  but  capability ;  capa- 
bility of  good  as  well  as  evil,  though  more  likely  from 
its  exposures,  to  be  evil  than  good.  It  is  not  the  de- 
pravity, then,  but  the  depravation  of  nature,  in  which 
we  believe. 

Secondly,  it  is  not  in  the  unlimited  application  of 
Paul's  language,  that  we  believe.  When  he  said,  "  No, 
not  one,"  he  did  not  mean  to  say,  without  qualifica- 
tion, that  there  was  not  one  good  man  in  the  world. 
He  believed  that  there  were  good  men.  He  did  not 
mean  to  say,  that  there  was  not  one  good  man  in  the 
heathen  world  ;  for  he  speaks  in  another  place,  of  those, 
who,  "  not  having  the  law,  were  a  law  to  themselves, 
and  by  nature  did  those  things  which  are  written  in 
the  law."  Paul  meant,  doubtless,  to  say,  that  the 
world  is  a  very  bad  world,  and  in  this  we  believe. 

Neither,  thirdly,  do  we  believe  in  what  is  technically 
called  "total  depravity;"  that  is  to  say,  a  total  and 
absolute  destitution  of  every  thing  right,  even  in  bad 
men.  No  such  critical  accuracy  do  we  beheve  that 
the  Apostle  ever  affected,  or  ever  thought  of  affecting. 
A  very  bad  child  may  sometimes  love  his  parents,  and 
be  melted  into  great  tenderness  toward  them ;  and  so 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  19 

a  mind  estranged  from  God,  may  sometimes  tenderly 
feel  his  goodness. 

Finally,  we  would  not  portray  human  wickedness 
without  the  deepest  consideration  and  pity  for  it. 
Alas  !  how  badly  is  man  educated,  how  sadly  is  he 
deluded,  how  ignorant  is  he  of  himself,  how  little  does 
he  perceive  the  great  love  of  God  to  him,  which,  if  he 
were  rightly  taught  to  see  it,  might  melt  him  into  ten- 
derness and  penitence.  Let  us  have  some  patience 
with  human  nature  till  it  is  less  cruelly  abused !  Let 
us  pity  the  sad  and  dark  struggle  that  is  passing  in 
many  hearts,  between  good  and  evil ;  and,  though 
evil  so  often  gains  the  ascendancy,  still  let  us  pity, 
while  we  blame  it ;  and  while  we  speak  to  it  in  the 
solemn  language  of  reprobation  and  warning,  let  us 
"tell  these  things,"  as  Paul  did,  "even  weeping." 

IV.  From  this  depraved  condition,  we  believe,  in  the 
fourth  place,  that  men  are  to  be  recovered,  by  a  pro- 
cess which  is  termed,  in  the  Scriptures,  regeneration. 
We  believe  in  regeneration,  or  the  new  birth.  That 
is  to  say,  we  believe,  not  in  all  the  ideas  which  men 
have  annexed  to  those  words,  but  in  what  we  under- 
stand the  sacred  writers  to  mean  by  them.  We  be- 
lieve that,  "except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  cannot 
see  the  kingdom  of  God  ;"  that  "  he  must  be  new  cre- 
ated in  Christ  Jesus  ;"  that  "  old  things  must  pass 
away,  and  all  things  become  new."  We  certainly 
think  that  these  phrases  applied  with  peculiar  force 
to  the  condition  of  people,  who  were  not  only  to  be 
converted  from  their  sins,  but  from  the  very  forms  of 
religion  in  which  they  had  been  brought  up  ;  and  we 
know  indeed  that  the  phrase  "  new  birth  "  did.  accord- 
ing to  the  usage  of  language  in  those  days,  apply  es- 
pecially to  the  bare  fact  of  proselytism.  But  we  be- 
lieve that  men  are  still  to  be  converted  from  their  sins, 


20  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

and  that  this  is  a  change  of  the  most  urgent  necessity, 
and  of  the  most  unspeakable  importance. 

The  apphcation  of  this  doctrine,  too,  is  nearly  uni- 
versal. Some,  like  Samuel  of  old,  may  have  grown 
up  to  piety  from  their  earliest  childhood,  and  it  may 
be  hoped  that  the  number  of  such,  through  the  means 
of  more  faithful  education,  is  increasing.  But  we  con- 
fess that  we  understand  nothing  of  that  romantic 
dream  of  the  innocence  of  childhood.  There  are  few 
children  who  do  not  need  to  be  "  converted ;"  from 
selfishness  to  disinterestedness,  from  the  sullenness  or 
violence  of  crossed  passions  to  meekness  and  submis- 
sion, from  the  dislike  to  the  love  of  piety  and  pious  ex- 
ercises ;  from  the  habits  of  a  sensual,  to  the  efforts  of 
a  rational  and  spiritual  nature.  Childhood  is,  indeed, 
often  pure,  compared  with  what  commonly  follows, 
but  still  it  needs  a  change.  And  that,  which  does 
commonly  follow,  is  a  character  which  needs  to  be  es- 
sentially changed,  in  order  to  prepare  the  soul  for  hap- 
piness in  heaven. 

Now  there  is  usually  a  time  in  the  life  of  every  de- 
voted Christian  when  this  change  commences.  We  say 
not,  a  moment ;  for  it  is  impossible  so  to  date  moral  ex- 
periences. But  there  is  a  time,  when  the  work  is  resolute- 
ly begun.  Begun,  we  say  ;  for  it  cannot  in  any  brief 
space  be  completed.  How  soon  it  may  be  so  far  com- 
pleted, as  to  entitle  its  subject  to  hope  for  future  hap- 
piness, it  is  neither  easy,  nor  material,  to  say.  But  to 
aver  that  it  may  be  done  in  a  moment,  is  a  doctrine 
of  which  it  is  difficult  to  say  whether  it  is,  in  our  view, 
more  unscriptural,  extravagant,  or  dangerous. 

With  such  qualifications  and  guards,  authorized  by 
the  laws  of  sound  criticism,  we  believe  in  regeneration : 
and  we  believe  that  the  spirit  of  God  is  offered  to  aid, 
in  this  great  work,  the  weakness  of  human  endeavour. 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  21 

V.  We  believe,  too,  in  the  fifth  place,  in  the  doctrine 
of  election.  That  is  to  say,  again,  we  believe  in  what 
the  Scriptures,  as  we  understand  them,  mean  by  that 
word. 

The  time  has  been,  when,  not  the  intrinsic  import- 
ance of  this  doctrine,  but  the  stress  laid  upon  it,  would 
have  required  that  we  should  give  it  considerable  space 
in  this  summary  view.     Our  good  old  Arminian  fa- 
thers fought  with  it  for  many  a  weary  day.     It  was 
the  great  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  the  last  gene- 
ration.    And,  during  our  time,  it  has  been  held,  firmly 
and  by  many  hands,  in  its  place,  as  one  of  the  essen- 
tial foundations  of  faith.     But,  within  a  few  years  past, 
it  has  come  to  be  almost  entirely  overlooked ;  many 
preachers  have  almost  ceased  to  direct  attention  to  it ; 
and  many  hearers  are  left  to  wonder  what  has  become 
of  it,  and  why  it  ever  occupied  a  situation  so  conspic- 
uous.    Would  that  the  history  of  it  might  be  a  lesson ! 
The    truth    is,  that   the  doctrine  of  election   is  a 
matter  either  of  scholastic  subtilty  or  of  presumptuous 
curiosity,  with  which,  as  we  apprehend,  we  have  but 
a  very   little  to  do.      Secret   things  belong   to   God. 
We  believe  in  what  the  Bible  teaches  of  God's  infinite 
and  eternal  foreknowledge.     We  believe  that,  of  all 
the  events  and  actions,  which  take  place  in  the  uni- 
verse of  worlds,  and  the  eternal  succession  of  ages,  there 
is  not  one,  not  the  minutest,  which  God  did  not  forever 
foresee,  with  all  the  distinctness  of  immediate  vision. 
It  is  a  sublime  truth.     But  it  is  a  truth,  which  the  mo- 
ment we  undertake  to  analyze  and  apply,  we  are  con- 
founded in  ignorance,  and  lost  in  wonder.    We  beheve, 
but  we  would  take  care  that  we  do  not  presumptuously 
believe.     We  believe  in  election,  not  in  selection.     We 
beheve  in  foreknowledge,  not  in  fate.     We  believe  in 
the  boundless  wisdom  of  God,  but  not  less  in  the  weak- 


22  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

ness  of  our  own  comprehension.  We  believe  that  his 
thoughts  are  not  as  our  thoughts,  and  that  his  ways 
are  not  as  our  ways,  and  his  counsels  are  not  as  our 
counsels,  and  his  decrees  are  not  as  our  decrees.  For 
as  the  heavens  are  high  above  the  earth,  so  is  he  above 
the  reach  of  our  frail  and  finite  understanding. 

VI.  Li  the  sixth  place,  we  believe  in  a  future  state 
of  rewards  and  punishments.  We  believe  that  sin  must 
ever  produce  misery,  and  that  holiness  must  ever  pro- 
duce happiness.  We  believe  that  there  is  good  for  the 
good,  and  evil  for  the  evil;  and  that  these  are  to  be 
dispensed  exactly  in  proportion  to  the  degree  in  which 
the  good  or  evil  qualities  prevail. 

The  language  of  Scripture,  and  all  the  language  of 
Scripture  on  this  solemn  subject,  we  have  no  hesitation 
about  using,  in  the  sense  in  which  it  was  originally 
meant  to  be  understood.  But  there  has  been  that  at- 
tempt to  give  definiteness  to  the  indefinite  language  of 
the  Bible  on  this  subject,  to  measure  the  precise  extent 
of  those  words  which  spread  the  vastness  of  the  un- 
known futurity  before  us;  and  with  this  system  of 
artificial  criticism,  the  popular  ignorance  of  Oriental 
figures  and  metaphors,  has  so  combined  to  fix  a  specific 
meaning  on  the  phraseology  in  question,  that  it  is 
difficult  to  use  it  without  constant  explanation.  "Life 
everlasting,"  and  "  everlasting  fire ;"  the  mansions  of 
rest,  and  the  worm  that  never  dieth,  are  phrases  fraught 
with  a  just  and  reasonable,  but  at  the  same  time,  vast 
and  indefinite  import.  They  are  too  obviously  figu- 
rative to  permit  us  to  found  definite  and  literal  state- 
ments upon  them.  And  it  is  especially  true  of  those 
figures  and  phrases  that  are  used  to  describe  future 
miseiy,  that  there  is  not  one  which  is  not  also  used  in 
the  Bible  to  describe  things  earthly,  limited,  and  tem- 
poi*ary. 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  23 

So  confident  in  their  opinions  are  men  made  by 
education  and  the  current  behef,  that  they  can  scarcely 
think  it  possible  that  the  words  of  Scripture  should  have 
any  other  meaning  than  that  which  they  assign  to 
them.  And  they  are  ready,  and  actually  feel  as  if 
they  had  a  right,  to  ask  those  who  differ  from  them  to 
give  up  the  Bible  altogether.  Nay,  they  go  so  far 
sometimes,  as  to  aver,  in  the  honesty  and  blindness  of 
their  prejudices,  that  their  opponents  have  given  up 
the  Bible,  and  have  given  up  all  thoughts  of  trying 
the  questions  at  issue  by  that  standard.  We  have 
an  equal  right  certainly  to  return  the  exhortation  and 
to  retort  the  charge.  At  any  rate,  we  can  accept 
neither.  We  believe  in  the  Scriptures,  as  heartily  as 
any  others,  and,  as  we  think,  more  justly.  We  believe 
in  all  that  they  teach  on  this  subject,  and  in  all  they 
teach  on  any  subject. 

We  believe,  then,  in  a  heaven  and  a  hell.  We  be- 
lieve that  there  is  more  to  be  feared  hereafter  than  any 
man  ever  feared,  and  more  to  be  hoped  than  any  man 
ever  hoped.  We  believe  that  heaven  is  more  glorious, 
and  that  hell  is  more  dreadful,  than  any  man  ever  con- 
ceived. We  believe  that  the  consequences  both  in  this 
world  and  another ;  that  the  consequences  to  every 
man,  of  any  evil  habits  he  forms,  whether  of  feeling  or 
action,  run  far  beyond  his  most  fearful  anticipations. 
Ai^e  mankind  yet  so  gross  in  their  conceptions,  that 
outward  images  convey  the  most  transporting  ideas 
they  have  of  happiness,  and  the  most  tremendous  ideas 
they  have  of  misery  ?  Is  a  celestial  city  all  that  they 
understand  by  heaven  ?  Let  them  know  that  there  is 
a  heaven  of  the  mind,  a  heaven  of  tried  and  confirmed 
virtue,  a  heaven  of  holy  contemplation,  so  rapturous, 
tliat  all  ideas  of  place  are  transcended,  are  almost  for- 
gotten in  its  ecstacy.     Is  a  world  of  elemental  fires  and 


24  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

bodily  torments,  all  that  they  understand  by  hell? 
Let  them  consider,  that  a  hell  of  the  mind,  the  hell  of 
an  inwardly  gnawing  and  burning  conscience,  the  hell 
of  remorse  and  mental  agony,  may  be  more  horrible 
than  fire,  and  brimstone,  and  the  blackness  of  dark- 
ness for  ever  !  Yes,  the  crushing  mountains,  the  fold- 
ing darkness,  the  consuming  fire  might  be  welcomed, 
if  they  could  bury,  or  hide,  or  sear  the  guilty  and  ago- 
nized passions,  which,  while  they  live,  must  for  ever 
and  for  ever  burn,  and  blacken,  and  blast  the  soul ; 
which,  while  they  live,  must  for  ever  and  for  ever  crush 
it  down  to  untold  and  unutterable  misery. 

YIl.  Once  more,  and  finally ;  we  believe  in  the  su- 
preme and  all-absorbing  importance  of  religion. 

There  is  nothing  more  astonishing  to  us,  than  the 
freedom  of  language  which  we  sometimes  hear  used, 
on  this  subject ;  the  bold  and  confident  tone  with  which 
it  is  said  that  there  is  no  religion  among  us,  nothing 
but  flimsy  and  fine  sentiment,  passing  under  the  name 
of  religion.  We  are  ready  to  ask,  what  is  religion  in 
the  hearts  of  men,  what  are  its  sources  and  fountains, 
when  they  can  so  easily  deny  it  to  the  hearts  of  others  ? 
We  are  inclined  to  use  no  severity  of  retort,  on  this 
affecting  theme  ;  else  the  observation  of  life  might  fur- 
nish us  with  some  trying  questions  for  the  uncharita- 
ble to  consider.  But  we  will  only  express  the  simple 
astonishment  we  feel  at  such  treatment.  We  will  only 
say  again,  and  say  it  more  in  wonder  than  in  anger ; 
what  must  religion  be  in  others,  what  can  be  its  kind- 
ness, and  tenderness,  and  peace,  and  preciousness,  when 
they  are  so  ready  to  rise  up  from  its  blessed  affections, 
to  the  denial  of  its  existence  in  the  hearts  of  their 
brethren  ? 

We  repeat,  then,  that  we  believe  in  the  supreme  and 
all-absorbing  importance  of  religion.     "  What  shall  it 


THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF.  25 

profit  a  man,  if  he  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his 
own  soul  ?"  is  to  us  the  most  undeniable  of  all  argu- 
ments;  "what  shall  I  do  to  be  saved?"  the  most 
reasonable  and  momentous  of  all  questions  ;  "God  be 
merciful  to  me,  a  sinner !"  the  most  affecting  of  all 
prayers.  The  soul's  concern  is  the  great  concern. 
The  interests  of  experimental,  vital,  practical  religion 
are  the  great  interests  of  our  being.  No  language  can 
be  too  strong,  no  language  can  be  strong  enough,  to 
give  them  due  expression.  No  anxiety  is  too  deep,  no 
care  too  heedful,  no  effort  too  earnest,  no  prayer  too 
importunate,  to  be  bestowed  upon  this  almost  infinite 
concern  of  the  soul's  purification,  piety,  virtue  and 
welfare.  No  labour  of  life  should  be  undertaken,  no 
journey  pursued,  no  business  transacted,  no  pleasure 
enjoyed,  no  activity  employed,  no  rest  indulged  in, 
without  ultimate  reference  to  tliat  great  end  of  our 
being.  Without  it,  life  has  no  sufficient  object,  and 
deatli  has  no  hope,  and  eternity  no  promise. 

^Yhat  more  shall  we  say  ?  Look  at  it ;  look  at  this 
inward  being,  and  say,  what  is  it?  Formed  by  the 
Almighty  hand,  and  therefore  formed  for  some  pur- 
pose ;  built  up  in  its  proportions,  fashioned  in  every 
part,  by  infinite  skill ;  an  emanation,  breathed  from 
the  spirit  of  God  ;  say,  what  is  it  ?  Its  nature,  its  ne- 
-cessity,  its  design,  its  destiny  ;  what  is  it  ?  So  formed 
it  is,  so  builded,  so  fashioned,  so  exactly  balanced,  and 
so  exquisitely  touched  in  every  part,  that  sin  intro- 
duced into  it,  is  the  direst  misery ;  that  every  unholy 
thought  falls  upon  it  as  a  drop  of  poison  ;  that  every 
guilty  desire,  breathing  upon  any  dehcate  part  or 
fibre  of  the  soul,  is  the  plague  spot  of  evil,  the  bhght 
of  death.  Made,  then,  is  it  for  virtue,  not  for  sin  ;  oh ! 
not  for  sin,  for  that  is  death ;  but  made  for  virtue,  for 


26  THE    UNITARIAN    BELIEF. 

purity,  as  its  end,  its  rest,  its  bliss ;  made  thus  by  God 
Almighty. 

Thou  canst  not  alter  it.  Go  and  bid  the  mountain 
walls  sink  down  to  the  level  of  the  valleys ;  go  and 
stand  upon  the  seashore  and  turn  back  its  swelling 
waves;  or  stretch  forth  thy  hand,  and  hold  the  stars 
in  their  courses  ;  but  not  more  vain  shall  be  thy  power 
to  change  them,  than  it  is  to  change  one  of  the  laws 
of  thy  nature.  Then  thou  "must  he  virtuous.  As  true 
it  is,  as  if  the  whole  imiverse  spoke  in  one  voice,  thou 
must  he  virtuous.  If  thou  art  a  sinner,  thou  "must 
be  born  again."  If  thou  art  tempted,  thou  must  resist. 
If  thou  hast  guilty  passions,  thou  must  deny  them.  If 
thou  art  a  bad  man,  thou  must  be  a  good  man. 

There  is  the  law.  It  is  not  our  law ;  it  is  not  our 
voice  that  speaks.  It  is  the  law  of  God  Almighty  ;  it 
is  the  voice  of  God  that  speaks ;  speaks  through  every 
nerve  and  fibre,  through  every  power  and  element  of 
that  moral  constitution  which  he  has  given.  It  is  the 
voice,  not  of  an  arbitrary  will,  nor  of  some  stern  and 
impracticable  law,  that  is  now  abrogated.  "For  the 
grace  of  God,  that  hath  appeared  to  all  men,  teaches, 
that,  denying  all  ungodliness  and  every  worldly  lust, 
they  must  live  soberly,  and  righteously,  and  godly  in 
this  present  evil  world."  So  let  us  live  ;  and  then  this 
life,  with  all  its  momentous  scenes,  its  moving  expe- 
riences, and  its  precious  interests,  shall  be  but  the  be- 
ginning of  the  wonders,  and  glories,  and  joys  of  our 
existence.  So  let  us  live ;  and  let  us  think  this,  that 
to  hve  thus,  is  the  great,  urgent,  instant,  unutterable, 
all-absorbing  concern  of  our  life  and  of  our  being. 


ON     T  H  E 

NATURE  OP  RELIGIOUS  BELIEF; 

WITH    INFERENCES    CONCERNING   DOUBT,    DECISION,    CONFIDENCE, 
AND    THE    TRIAL.    OF    FAITH. 


JSTow  I  know  in  part. — 1  Cor.  xiii.  12. 

It  is  of  some  importance,  I  think  it  is  of  no  little  im- 
portance, that  we  should  entertain  just  ideas  of  the  na- 
ture of  religious  belief.  To  this  subject  therefore,  and 
especially  with  a  view  to  consider  some  difficulties  and 
to  meet  some  practical  questions,  I  wish,  at  present,  to 
invite  your  attention. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  it  may  be  observed  in  general, 
that  religious  belief  is  essentially  of  the  same  nature 
as  moral  belief.  In  form  they  differ,  but  in  substance 
they  are  the  same.  The  common  distinction  between 
Religion  and  Morals,  as  totally  different  things,  is  as 
"erroneous  in  principle  as  it  is  mjurious  in  its  effects. 
Both  have  their  root  in  the  same  great  original  sense 
of  rectitude,  which  God  has  impressed  on  our  nature ; 
and  without  which  we  should  not  be  men.  By  reli- 
gion, we  mean  our  duty  to  God ;  and  by  morals,  our 
duty  to  men :  and  both  are  bound  upon  us  by  the  same 
essential  reason ;  that  they  are  right.  Or  they  are 
respectively,  the  love  of  God  and  the  love  of  men  ;  and 
both,  in  their  highest  character,  are  a  love  of  the  same 
goodness.     Piety  and  philanthropy  are  essentially  of 


28  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

the  same  nature.  The  Bible  appeals  to  both  alike, 
and  it  does  not  sever,  but  it  binds  them  together ;  sum- 
ming up  all  its  commandments  in  these  two ;  "  Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself : "  and  saying  emphatically, 
"he  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom  he  hath  seen, 
how  can  he  love  God  whom  he  hath  not  seen !" 

Further ;  as  the  original  grounds  of  conviction,  so 
the  steps  by  which  we  arrive  at  our  conclusions  in 
both  of  these  spheres  of  duty,  are  essentially  the  same. 
The  steps  are  steps  of  reasoning.  The  Bible 
teaches  morals  and  religion  alike,  and  teaches  them 
in  the  same  way  ;  and  we  arrive  at  its  meaning  in 
both,  by  the  same  means ;  viz.  by  that  process  of 
reasoning,  called  criticism.  There  is  not  one  kind  of 
criticism  to  be  applied  to  those  texts  which  teach  the 
love  of  God,  and  another  to  those  which  teach  the  love 
of  man  ;  there  is  the  same  process  of  reasoning  in  both 
cases.  And  so  in  Natural  Theology,  and  Moral  Phi- 
losophy, alike,  we  begin  with  certain  original  truths  in 
the  mind,  and  proceed  to  deduce  certain  duties ;  and 
in  both  cases,  the  process  of  reasoning  is,  in  kind,  the 
same. 

But  now  the  material  question,  and  that  to  which 
I  have  been  endeavouring  to  bring  you,  is  this ;  what 
kind  of  reasoning  is  it  ?  And  the  answer  is  plain  ;  it 
is  that  kind  of  reasoning  which  is  usually  called  moral 
reasoning.  It  is  commonly  defined,  simply  by  being 
distinguished  from  mathematical  reasoning.  That  is 
to  say,  it  is  not  like  a  mathematical  deduction,  infal- 
lible ;  it  is  not  attended  with  a  feeling  of  certainty,  but 
only  of  belief. 

But  still  we  must  distinguish  ;  f(  r  it  is  important  to 
observe  that  the  difference  of  which  we  speak  relates 
only  to  deductions ;  not  at  all  to  principles.     The 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  29 

original  principles  of  religion  and  morals  are  certain. 
They  are  as  certain  as  any  other  principles ;  as  cer- 
tain as  the  principles  on  which  mathematical  science 
is  founded.  They  are  not  matters  of  belief  at  all,  but 
matters  of  absolute  knowledge.  Though  not  in  reli- 
gious belief,  accurately  speaking,  yet  in  religion,  there 
are  absolute  certainties.  I  am  as  sure  that  I  have  a 
conscience  and  a  religious  nature ;  I  am  as  sure  again, 
that  benevolence  and  other  moral  qualities  are  right ; 
and  I  am  as  sure  that  my  nature  is  constituted  to  ap- 
prove and  love  them,  wherever  they  appear,  in  man 
or  in  God,  as  I  am  of  my  own  existence  and  identity, 
or  as  I  am  that  my  nature  is  constituted  to  assent  to 
the  truth  of  any  mathematical  axioms.  It  is  impor- 
tant to  say  this,  because  the  distinction  commonly 
made  between  mathematical  and  moral  reasonings, 
may  be  carelessl}^  extended,  so  as  to  cover  more 
ground  than  belongs  to  it.  For  the  basis  of  the  math- 
ematics is  not  more  certain  and  irrefragable,  than  the 
basis  of  morals. 

But  the  moment  we  take  one  step  from  that  basis, 
from  those  first  principles,  and  enter  upon  deductions, 
it  is  agreed  by  all  reasoners,  that  a  marked  and  essen- 
tial difference  obtains.  In  the  mathematics,  every 
step  of  the  deduction  is  as  certain  as  the  principle  from 
-which  it  started.  In  moral  reasonings,  it  is  not  so. 
The  ideas,  involved  in  these  reasonings,  are  not  so 
definite,  the  terms  not  so  clear,  and  the  result  is,  by 
no  means,  so  unerring.  The  steps  of  moral  deduction, 
of  philological  criticism,  are  not  steps  of  demonstration. 
But  these  are  the  steps  that  lead  to  religious  belief, 
that  conduct  to  a  creed.  A  creed  is  not  a  certainty, 
but  a  belief.  Put  any  certainty  into  a  creed,  and  the 
absurdity  would  at  once  be  felt.  No  one  could  grave- 
ly stand  up  and  say,  "  I  believe  in  my  own  existence ; 
3* 


30  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

I  believe  in  my  identity  ;  I  believe  that  I  ought  to  be 
a  good  man."  These  are  matters  of  certainty ;  but 
the  propositions  of  a  creed  are  matters  of  logical  infer- 
ence. The  seal  upon  it  is  not  absolute  consciousness, 
but  religious  conviction.  The  scale,  on  which  that 
conviction  is  marked,  is  the  scale  of  probability.  I 
use  this  term,  probability,  I  ought  to  say,  in  the  tech- 
nical sense  which  moral  reasoners  assign  to  it,  which 
is  stronger,  and  more  definite  than  the  popular  sense. 
I  use  it  as  simply  opposed  to  certainty.  On  the  scale 
of  probability,  or  of  moral  reasoning,  in  other  words, 
belief  often  rises,  no  doubt,  almost  to  certainty.  But 
it  never,  strictly  speakmg,  arrives  at  that  point.  It  is 
never  absolute  certainty ;  it  is  never  perfect  know- 
ledge.    For,  "  we  know  in  part,"  says  the  Apostle. 

From  these  views,  I  am  not  aware  that  any  intelli- 
gent moral  or  religious  reasoners  dissent.  The  dis- 
tinction is  familiar  in  all  the  standard  writers,  and  may 
be  considered  as  the  settled  judgment  of  all  who  are 
competent  to  form  an  opinion  on  the  subject.  Moral 
evidence  is  not  demonstration.  Belief  is  not  know- 
ledge. Believing  a  thing  to  be  true,  is  not  knowing  it 
to  be  true. 

Not  to  dwell  longer,  then,  upon  a  point  so  plain, 
and  so  universally  conceded,  my  further  purpose  is  to 
offer  some  remarks  upon  this  admitted  nature  of  re- 
ligious belief. 

I.  My  first  remark  is,  if  the  view  presented  be  just, 
that  it  is  common  to  assign,  in  some  respects,  a  very 
injurious  and  unwarrantable  importance  to  doubts. 

Doubts  enter  into  the  very  processes  by  which  we 
arrive  at  belief  Nay,  they  enter  into  the  very  nature 
of  belief  itself.  They  constitute  a  part  of  it,  by  very 
definition.  Believing  is  doubting,  to  a  certain  extent. 
Believing  and  doubting  are  correlative  terms.     They 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  31 

are  caessential  elements.  "We  know  in  part."  That 
is  to  say,  our  knowledge  is  imperfect.  But  imperfect 
knowledge  implies  uncertainty.  And  uncertainty  is 
doubt. 

But  the  prevalent  feeling  and  policy  of  the  Christian 
world  has  been,  to  beat  down  and  destroy  doubts.  It 
has  given  them  no  quarter.  It  has  allowed  them  no 
place  in  the  theory  of  its  creeds,  though  those  creeds 
have  begun  with  the  phrase  "I  believe  ;"  not  "I  know," 
but  "I  believe."  And  this  tendency  of  the  public 
opinion  and  practice  of  the  churches,  has  had  the  effect, 
I  wish  it  may  be  considered,  to  give  not  only  an  un- 
warrantable, but  a  most  injurious  importance  to  doubts. 
Its  effect  has  been,  not  only  to  rend  the  bosom  of  the 
church,  to  cast  out  many  honest  and  virtuous  men  from 
it,  to  make  a  new  sect  for  every  new  doubt ;  but,  I 
fear,  to  make  many,  who  might  have  been  preserved 
from  that  result,  infidels.  Doubt,  I  say,  has  derived  a 
factitious  importance,  from  this  universal  persecution. 
That  portion  of  evidence,  which  leads  a  man  to  doubt, 
has  been  held  by  him  to  deserve  more  attention,  than 
that  which  leads  him  to  believe.  One  fraction  of  doubt 
has  weighed  with  him  more  than  nine  parts  of  evidence 
in  favour  of  Christianity,  and  he  has  become  an  unbe- 
liever, we  may  say,  against  his  own  convictions.  It  is 
an  independent  and  honest  mind,  too — which  makes 
the  case  a  more  unfortunate  one — that  is  especially 
liable  to  be  carried  away  by  this  fallacy.  Such  an 
one,  afraid  of  every  thing  implicit  and  traditional  in 
faith,  says,  "  I  have  a  doubt ;  I  must  be  fair  and  impar- 
tial ;  I  must  be  true  to  my  convictions  ;  I  must  assent 
to  nothing  from  fear  or  favour ;  /  have  a  doubt,^^  this 
man  says,  "  and  how  can  I  say  I  believe,  so  long  as  I 
doubt  ?"  But  why,  let  me  ask  in  turn,  should  he  pay 
this  sort  of  homage  to  a  mere  negative  conviction? 


32  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

What  is  there  m  a  doubt ;  that  is  to  say,  what  is  there 
in  a  reason  against,  that  is  to  be  treated  with  so  much 
more  consideration,  than  in  a  reason  for  /  Why 
should  not  this  man  say,  though  he  may  not  feel  that 
the  argument  is  perfectly  satisfactory,  though  he  may 
be  troubled  with  doubts  ;  why  should  he  not  say,  "  I 
have  twice  as  much  evidence  for  the  Bible  and  a  future 
life,  as  I  have  against  them,  and  how  can  I  doubt  so 
long  as  I  have  that  evidence  ?"  I  am  sure  this  conclu- 
sion would  be  twice  as  rational  as  the  other  ;  and  I  am 
certain,  that  the  spirit  of  this  conclusion  would  have 
saved  many  from  unbelief  But  we  do  not  ask  so 
much  as  we  have  asked,  in  form,  and  by  way  of  re- 
joinder. We  do  not  ask,  we  have  no  right,  as  advo- 
cates or  apologists  for  Christianity,  to  ask  the  man 
who  hesitates,  to  say  that  he  has  no  doubts  ;  but  we  do 
ask,  and  have,  in  reason,  a  right  to  ask,  that  he  should 
yield  his  mind,  not  to  any  assumed  power  or  impor- 
tance of  doubt,  but  to  the  preponderance  of  evidence. 

Beside  the  doubt  about  Christianity,  there  is  another 
which  may  be  considered  as  a  part  of  it,  but  which,  I 
think,  demands  a  distinct  notice ;  and  that  is,  the 
doubt  about  a  future  life.  This  is  a  doubt  which  is 
much  more  frequently  felt,  than  expressed.  You  will 
always  observe,  when  it  is  expressed,  that  it  is  done 
with  great  reluctance  and  caution,  with  a  feeling 
almost  as  if  a  crime  were  confessed ;  and  with  a  feel- 
ing too,  as  if  the  matter  of  the  confession  were  quite  as 
peculiar  to  the  individual  confessing,  as  it  is  painful  to 
him. 

Now  the  difficulty  here  arises  from  our  not  suffi- 
ciently considering  the  nature  of  moral  evidence,  the 
nature  of  religious  belief  It  would  relieve  us,  to  be  at 
once  more  frank  and  rational,  instead  of  wrapping  up 
the  matter  like  a  dark  secret,  in  the  cloud  of  our  specu- 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  33 

lative  misapprehensions.  The  truth  is,  that,  in  doubt 
on  this  point,  there  is  nothing  very  strange.  It  belongs 
to  more  minds  than  you  may  imagine.  It  must  belong, 
more  or  less,  to  all  minds.  It  enters  into  the  very 
nature  of  our  belief  in  a  future  state.  For  that  belief 
is  not  certainty.  The  point  in  question,  is  not  the 
subject  of  intuition.  No  man  ever  saw  the  world  of 
departed  spirits.  All  the  views  and  convictions,  that 
any  man  has  or  can  have  about  it,  fall  short  of  actual 
knowledge.  We  believe,  indeed,  in  the  divine  mission 
of  Christ.  We  believe,  too,  in  the  mercy  of  God,  and 
should  entertain  some  hope  of  a  future  life,  even  on  the 
general  ground  of  natural  Theology.  We  see  not, 
moreover,  how  the  scene  of  this  life  can  be  cleared  up, 
how  the  great  plan  of  things  can  be  made  consistent 
or  tolerable,  without  a  future  scene.  And  on  all  these 
accounts  we  have  a  strong  faith  in  futurity.  But  to 
say  that  this  faith  has  passed  beyond  every  shadow  of 
doubt,  is  to  say  more  than  is  true,  more  than  can  be 
reasonably  demanded  of  faith. 

Now  this  shadow,  sometimes  passing  over  the  mind ; 
why  should  it  chill,  or  darken,  or  distress  any  one,  as 
if  it  were  something  portentous,  or  in  fact,  anything 
extraordinary  ?  Certainty,  it  is  true,  would  be  gi*ate- 
ful.  Uncertainty  is  painful ;  though  it  is  also,  I  think, 
and  will  yet  attempt  to  show,  useful.  It  is  painful, 
however,  I  confess,  in  proportion  as  it  is  great.  But 
this  is  what  I  say ;  it  is  not  at  all  surprising.  It  is  a 
part  of  our  dispensation.  Some  clouds  are  between  us 
and  those  ever  bright  regions,  in  whose  existence  we 
fully  believe.  So  God  has  willed  it  to  be  We  see 
through  a  glass  darkly.  We  walk  by  faith  and  not 
by  sight.  We  long  for  a  sight  of  those  regions  of 
existence  in  which  we  are  to  live ;  but  it  has  not 
pleased  God  to  give  us  that  vision. 


34  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

And  the  point  that  I  would  urge  is,  that  we  should 
not  give  any  undue  importance  to  this  lack  of  vision, 
or  of  certainty.  We  should  do  most  unwisely  and 
unnecessarily,  to  magnify  the  importance  of  this  doubt, 
by  considering  it  as  anything  peculiar,  or  awful,  or 
criminal.  It  is  painful,  indeed,  but  not  wonderful.  It 
is  painful;  but  the  pain,  like  all  the  pains  of  our  moral 
imperfection,  is  an  element  of  improvement ;  and  it  is 
to  be  removed  by  reflection,  by  prayer,  by  self-purifica- 
tion. To  the  mind  rightly  thinking  and  feeling,  the 
evidence  of  immortality  is  growing  continually  stronger 
and  stronger.  Already  with  some,  it  touches  upon  the 
borders  of  certainty.  So  may  it  do  with  every  one 
who  hears  me.  And  the  direction  to  be  given  for  every 
one's  guidance  is,  not  to  stumble  at  doubt,  but  to  press 
on  to  certainty.  And  I  hold  and  firmly  believe,  that 
an  assurance,  all  but  vision,  is  just  as  certainly  at  the 
end  of  the  process,  with  every  right  mind,  as  complete 
demonstration  is  at  the  end  of  every  true  theorem  in 
science. 

This  undue  importance  attached  to  doubts,  becomes 
a  still  more  serious  matter,  when  it  affects  not  only  a 
man's  opinions,  but  his  practice.  Do  not  many  neglect 
to  lead  a  strictly  virtuous  and  religious  life,  on  this  plea 
of  uncertainty  about  the  result  ?  Is  it  not,  at  least,  the 
plea  which  the  heart  secretly  offers,  to  justify  its  indo- 
lence or  indifference  ?  A  man  says  with  himself,  "  I 
do  not  know  what  is  the  right  way,  there  are  so  many 
disputes  about  it ;"  and  he  thinks  that,  an  apology  for 
his  neglect  of  the  whole  subject.  Or  he  says,  perhaps, 
"  I  do  not  know  that  the  Bible  is  true ;  I  do  not  k?ioip 
that  there  is  any  future  life,  or  that  there  is  any  retri- 
bution hereafter.  If  I  did  knoio  it,  I  should  act  upon 
my  knowledge ;  but  the  fact  is,  there  is  no  certainty 
about  these  matters,  and  therefore  I  shall  give  myself 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  35 

no  trouble  about  them."  Now  to  justify  this  conclu- 
sion, he  should  be  able  to  say,  "  I  know  that  the  Bible 
is  not  true,  and  that  there  is  no  future  life,  and  no 
retribution  hereafter."  If  he  could  say  this,  then  his 
premises  would  be  as  broad  as  his  conclusion.  But  to 
say,  "  I  do  not  know,"  and  therefore  to  do  nothing,  is 
as  if  a  man  should  say,  "  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall 
have  a  crop,  and  therefore  I  will  sow  no  seed ;"  or,  "  I 
do  not  know  that  I  shall  gain  property,  and  therefore  I 
will  do  no  business  ;"  or,  ''  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall 
obtain  happiness,  and  therefore  I  will  not  seek  it."  The 
truth  is,  that,  in  the  affairs  of  this  life,  men  act  upon 
the  strongest  evidence,  upon  the  strongest  probability ; 
it  is  a  part  of  the  very  wisdom  of  their  condition,  that 
they  should  so  act ;  and  so  they  ought  to  act,  so  it  is 
wise  that  they  should  be  left  to  act,  in  the  affairs  of 
religion.  If  any  one  refuses  to  act  upon  such  a  ground, 
he  refuses  the  discipline  of  his  own  nature,  and  of 
God's  providence  ;  and  neither  his  own  nature  nor  the 
providence  of  heaven,  will  hold  him  guiltless. 

11.  Nay  more,  as  a  religious  being,  he  must  act  upon 
some  ground,  and  he  ought  to  choose  the  most  reason- 
able ground ;  and  this  is  the  substance  of  the  second 
remark  I  have  to  offer  on  the  nature  of  religious  belief. 

It  is  not  often  enough  considered,  perhaps,  that  every 
man,  every  thinking  man,  at  least,  must  have  some 
theory,  must  choose  between  opposing  arguments  ; 
must  come  to  some  conclusion,  which  he  is  to  take 
and  defend,  with  all  its  difficulties.  He  who  doubts, 
is  apt  to  regard  himself  as  occupying  vantage  ground 
in  religious  discussion ;  as  occupying  a  position  above 
the  believer,  and  entitled  to  look  down  upon  him 
without  sympathy,  and  even  with  scorn ;  as  if  he,  the 
infidel,  stood  aloof  from  the  difficulties  that  press  upon 
questions  of  this  nature.    But  this  is  an  entire  mistake. 


36  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

He  too,  the  infidel,  is  in  the  battle,  and  there  is  no  dis- 
charge in  that  war.  I  have  said  that  believing  is  doubt- 
ing to  a  certain  extent.  I  now  say  that  doubting  is 
believing  to  a  certain  extent.  The  doubter  holds  a 
theory.  That  extreme  of  doubt,  denominated  Pyrrlion- 
ism,  is  still  a  theory.  It  is  believing  something  ;  and 
something  very  prodigious,  too  ;  even  that  nothing  is 
to  be  believed  !  Doubting,  I  say,  is  believing  to  a  certain 
extent.  A  man  may  say  he  is  certain  of  nothing.  But 
he  is  certain,  I  suppose,  of  his  vmcertainty ;  certain  that 
he  is  a  doubter ;  certain  then  that  he  is  a  thinker ; 
certain  that  he  is  a  conscious  being.  But  still  he  may 
say,  willing  to  doubt  all  he  can,  that  with  regard  to 
the  objects  of  his  consciousness,  he  can  have  no  cer- 
tainty. He  is  conscious  of  the  difference  between  truth 
and  error,  right  and  wrong ;  but  he  is  not  certain,  he 
says,  that  these  perceptions  of  his  agree  with  the  abso- 
lute, the  real  truth  of  things.  Is  this  doubt  reasonable ; 
or  possible?  A  man  has  a  perception  of  existence. 
What  existence  ?  His  own.  He  knows  that  he  exists. 
A  man  has  a  perception  of  rectitude.  What  rectitude? 
Why,  of  a  rectitude  imthin  him^  just  as  certainly 
existing  as  he  exists.  There  is  a  feeling  in  him  :  he 
approves  it.  That  is  final.  He  cannot  go  behind  this 
consciousness,  into  a  region  of  doubt,  any  more  than 
he  can  go  behind  the  consciousness  of  his  existence. 
Like  a  flash  of  lightning,  like  the  voice  of  thunder,  is 
this  revelation  of  conscience  from  the  thickest  cloud  of 
his  doubts ;  it  is  as  clear  and  strong  and  irresistible. 

But  suppose  that  we  have  brought  the  doubter  thus 
far  to  the  recognition  of  the  great  primitive  facts  of 
philosophy  and  religion  ;  yet  when  we  come  to  the 
deductions  from  these  facts,  to  a  system  of  faith,  we 
have  admitted  that  there  is  some  uncertainty.  How 
shall  our  reasoner  proceed  here  ?     Shall  he  say  that 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  37 

because  there  is  imcertainty,  he  will  beheve  nothing  ? 
That  would  be  refusing  to  do  the  only  thing  and  the 
very  thing,  which  the  circumstances  require  of  him  : 
even  to  choose  between  opposing  arguments.  It  would 
be  as  if  the  mariner  should  say,  "  the  waters  are  un- 
stable beneath  me ;  they  sway  me  this  way  and  that 
way ;  and  I  will  lay  no  course  across  the  deep."  No, 
the  only  question  is  ;  what  is  it  best  to  do  7  What  is 
the  wisest  course  to  take  ?  What  is  it  most  reasonable 
to  believe  in  ?  The  moral  inquirer  is  on  the  ocean  ; 
and  to  give  himself  up  to  doubt,  indifference  and  in- 
action, is  to  perish  there.  And  the  question  is  between 
remaining  in  this  state,  and  adopting  some  religious 
faith  for  guidance  and  support. 

Now  it  appears  to  me,  that  the  coldest  and  feeblest 
statement  of  the  argument  for  religious  faith,  gathers 
strength  and  warmth,  from  being  placed  in  this  point 
of  light.  For  thus  would  a  man  reason  on  this  ground. 
"To  doubt  every  thing,  to  doubt  all  the  primitive  facts 
of  my  moral  consciousness,  I  have  admitted,  is  self- 
contradicting  absurdity.  But  to  reject  all  religious 
systems  flowing  from  them,  because  they  are  not 
equally  certain,  is  as  false  in  philosophy  as  to  reject 
the  original  facts.  Something,  I  must  believe  ;  some- 
thing better  or  something  worse.  Some  conclusions 
flow  out  of  the  principles,  and  I  cannot  help  it.  To 
reject  all  conclusion  is  irrational  and  impossible  folly. 
Nay  more,  I  am  bound  to  accept  those  conclusions  that 
favour  the  improvement  of  my  nature.  That  I  am 
made  to  improve  is  as  certain  as  that  I  am  made  to  be. 
Now  to  reject  all  religious  faith,  is  ruin  to  my  spiritual 
nature.  To  deny,  for  instance,  the  doctrine  of  immor- 
tality, comes  to  the  same  thing ;  my  soul  dies  now,  if 
it  is  not  to  live  for  ever.  To  reject  Christianity  is  to 
reject  what  is  obviously  the  most  powerful  means  of 
4 


38  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

improvement  in  the  Avorld.  At  any  rate,  if  there  be  no 
truth  at  all  in  religion,  if  its  grandest  principles  are 
falsehoods,  and  its  grandest  revelations  are  dreams, 
then  the  very  spring  of  improvement  in  me  is  broken, 
and  my  situation  involves  this  astounding  absurdity ; 
that  I  am  made  to  improve,  to  be  happy  in  nothing 
else,  and  yet  that  this  is  the  very  thing  for  which  no 
provision  is  made ;  that  an  appetite  is  given  me,  which 
craves  divine  and  immortal  good ;  that  on  its  being 
supplied  depends  the  essential  life  of  my  mind  and 
heart ;  and  yet,  that  beneath  the  heavens  there  is  no 
food  for  it ;  no,  nor  above  the  heavens ;  that  the  only 
provision  made  for  it  is  poison  and  death !" 

Can  this  be? — as  it  must  be  if  the  skeptic's  theory 
be  true.  Can  it  be  that  a  light  is  on  my  path,  w4iich 
leads  me  to  the  loftiest  and  most  blessed  virtue  and 
happiness — such  is  the  light  of  religion — and  yet  that 
it  sprung  from  the  dark  suggestions  of  fraud  and  im- 
posture ?  Can  it  be.  that  God  has  formed  our  minds 
to  feel  the  most  inexpressible  longings  after  a  life  be- 
yond the  barriers  of  time ;  and  yet,  that  he  has  left 
our  hearts  to  break  with  the  dreadful  conviction  that 
the  blessed  land  is  not  for  us?  Is  this  the  obvious 
reasonableness  of  the  skeptic's  choice?  Is  this  the 
charm  of  doubt,  that  is  to  outweigh  the  whole  mass 
of  evidence?  Why  such  useless  and  cruel  contradic- 
tions and  incongruities,  as  enter  into  the  unbeliever's 
plan  ?  Why  are  we  sent  to  wander  through  this  world, 
in  sorrow  and  despair,  as  we  must  do,  if  there  is  no 
guiding  light  and  no  inviting  prospect? 

It  w^ould  be  easy,  if  there  were  space  in  this  discus- 
sion, to  present  in  many  lights,  the  glaring  contradic- 
tions to  which  skepticism  must  lead,  and  which  surely 
are  harder  to  receive  than  any  tolerably  rational  sys- 
tem of  faith.     Suppose  that  such  system  were  not  free 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  39 

from  serious  difficulties.  I  think  it  is;  but  suppose 
that  it  were  not.  Yet  if  the  weight  of  evidence  be  in 
its  favour ;  and  if  we  must  embrace  some  system,  and 
that  of  faith  clears  up  more  difficulties  than  the  oppo- 
site system ;  is  it  not  most  reasonable  that  our  minds 
should  settle  down  into  a  calm  and  confiding  behef  ? 
Let  every  man,  with  these  views,  make  his  election. 
Let  him  choose — for  these  are  the  questions — whether 
he  will  take,  for  his  portion,  light  or  darkness,  cheer- 
fulness or  sadness,  hope  or  despair,  the  warmth  of  con- 
fiding piety  or  the  cold  and  cheerless  atmosphere  of 
distrust,  the  spirit  of  sacred  improvement  or  the  spirit 
of  worldly  negligence  and  apathy.  I  do  not  wish,  in 
making  this  contrast,  to  speak  with  any  harshness  of 
skepticism.  I  state  it  as  it  appears  to  myself,  and  as  it 
would  appear,  let  me  embrace  whichever  theory  I 
might.  Faith  is  light,  and  cheerfulness,  and  hope,  and 
devotion,  and  improvement.  And  doubt,  on  essential 
points,  is  in  its  very  nature  darkness,  and  sadness,  and 
despondency,  and  distrust,  and  spiritual  death. 

For  which,  think  you — for  I  cannot  help  pressing 
the  alternative  a  moment  longer — for  which  was  our 
nature  made  ?  To  be  lifted  up  and  strengthened,  to 
be  bright  and  happy,  or  to  be  cast  down  and  crushed ; 
to  be  the  victim  of  doubt ;  to  be  plunged  into  the  dun- 
geon of  despair?  Suppose  a  man  should  literally  shut 
himself  up  in  a  dungeon,  should  sit  down  in  darkness, 
and  surround  himself  with  none  but  dismal  objects, 
should  resign  his  powers  to  inaction,  and  give  up  all 
the  glorious  prospects  and  enjoyments  of  the  wide  and 
boundless  universe;  and  then  should  say,  that  this 
was  the  portion  designed  for  him  by  the  Author  of 
nature.  What  should  we  say  to  him?  We  should 
say,  and  surely  we  should  take  strong  ground,  "Your 
Maker  has  given  you  limbs,  and  senses ;  he  has  given 


40  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

you  active  powers,  and  capacities  for  improvement,  and 
he  designed  that  you  shoukl  use  them ;  he  made  you 
not  to  dwell  in  a  prison,  not  to  dwell  in  dungeon 
glooms,  but  he  made  you  for  light,  and  action,  and 
freedom,  and  improvement,  and  happiness.  Your 
senses,  your  very  faculties,  both  of  body  and  mind,  will 
perish  and  die,  in  this  situation ;  go  forth,  then,  into 
the  open  and  fair  domain  of  nature  and  life."  And 
this  we  may  say,  with  equal  force,  to  hmi  who  is  paus- 
ing on  the  threshold  of  the  dreary  prison-house  of 
skepticism.  God  made  us  not  to  know,  not  to  know 
everything,  for  then  must  he  have  made  us  equal  to 
himself ;  but  to  believe,  to  confide,  to  trust.  And  he 
who  refuses  to  receive  what  is  reasonable,  because  it  is 
not  certain,  refuses  obedience  to  that  very  law,  under 
which  he  is  created  and  must  live. 


II. 

JVow  I  know  in  part. — 1  Cor.  xiii.  12. 

From  these  words,  I  resume  the  subject  of  my  morn- 
ing discourse.  The  subject  was  the  nature  of  rehgious 
beUef,  though  it  was  my  leading  object  to  present  some 
infej'ences  from  the  admitted  principles  of  this  kind  of 
belief  With  regard  to  the  nature  of  faith,  however, 
I  stated  what  is  admitted  on  all  hands,  that  it  is  not 
certainty ;  that  believing  is  not  knowing ;  that  this 
kind  of  conviction  is  entirely  to  be  distinguished  from 
intuition  and  from  the  results  of  scientific  demonstra- 
tion. But  in  this  account  of  faith,  I  said  that  its  ori- 
ginal principles  are  not  to  be  confounded.  They  are 
certain.  They  are  not  matters  of  faith,  but  of  know- 
ledge. I  do  not  believe  that  I  exist ;  I  know  it.  I  do 
not  believe  in  the  difference  between  right  and  wrong ; 
I  know  it.  I  do  not  believe  that  benevolence  or  the 
promotion  of  others'  happiness  is  right ;  I  know  it.  Li 
all  these  cases,  I  assert  a  self-evident  proposition ;  a 
truism,  in  fact.  I  am  but  saying  in  effect,  that  right 
is  right,  and  wrong  is  w^rong.  But  the  moment  I  de- 
part from  these  primary  moral  distinctions  and  first 
truths  of  religion,  and  take  one  step  of  deduction,  that 
is  a  step  of  faith.  Absolute  certainty  then  forsakes 
me,  and  I  stand  upon  the  ground  of  faith.  My  deduc- 
tions then  are  not  mathematical,  but  moral ;  they  are 
not  certain,  but  they  take  their  place  on  the  scale  of 
logical  probability.  That  is  to  say,  they  are  accom- 
panied with  something  more  or  less  of  doubt ;  and  re- 
ligious doubting  therefore,  ought  not  to  be  made  the 
4* 


42  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

monster  that  it  has  been,  in  the  Christian  world.  It 
is  giving  an  unwarrantable  importance  to  doubt,  thus 
to  treat  it.  And  this  was  the  matter  of  my  first  infer- 
ence. My  next  observation  was,  that  every  thinking 
man  must  have  a  system,  and  is  bound  to  adopt  that 
which  is  most  reasonable ;  that  the  skeptic  has  a  sys- 
tem as  truly  as  the  believer ;  and  that  in  the  balance 
of  probabilities,  the  skeptic  has  adopted  a  system,  which 
not  only  has  its  difficulties,  like  every  other,  but  which 
has  this  special  and  insuperable  difficulty ;  that  it  is 
fatal  to  the  clearest  principles  and  dearest  hopes  of 
human  improvement. 

III.  In  connection  with  what  I  have  said  about  the 
nature  of  faith,  let  me  now  observe,  in  the  third  place, 
that  those  who  profess  to  know  that  they  are  right^ 
who  profess  this  not  only  in  regard  to  the  great  points 
of  conscience  and  of  consciousness,  but  also  in  regard  to 
the  peculiarities  of  their  creed,  have  as  little  to  support 
them,  in  a  just  view  of  the  subject,  as  those  who  give 
an  undue  importance  to  their  doubts  ;  or  as  those  Avho 
choose  a  system  of  doubt,  (b}^  definition,  the  weaker 
system,)  in  preference  to  a  system  of  faith. 

I  have  heard  men  say,  when  comparing  themselves 
with  their  religious  opponents,  and  I  have  remarded 
that  it  was  said  witn  great  self-complacency  ;  "  The 
difference  between  us  and  others  is,  that  they  think 
indeed,  that  they  are  right,  but  we  know  that  we  are 
right.  They  are  confident  that  they  hold  the  truth, 
but  xoe  are  certain  that  we  hold  the  truth."  Now  for 
any  men  to  say  this,  is  so  very  little  to  the  credit  of 
their  discrimination,  that  it  cannot  be  much  to  the 
credit  of  their  correctness.  It  shows  that  so  far  from 
being  entitled  to  presume  that  they  have  the  right 
faith,  that  they  do  not  know  what  any  faith  is ;  that 
they  do  not  know  what  faith  is  in  the  most  generic 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  43 

sense ;  that  they  do  not  understand  the  definition  of 
the  term.  Faith  is  not  knowledge.  Beheving  that 
we  are  right  is  not,  in  any  tolerable  use  of  the  Eng- 
lish language,  knowing  that  we  are  right.  For  what 
a  man  seeth,  why  doth  he  yet  hope  for?  What  he 
knoweth,  why  doth  he  speak  of  as  a  matter  of  faith  ? 
Demonstration  is  one  thing  ;  a  creed  is  another,  and 
an  entirely  different  thing.     It  is  so  by  definition. 

I  do  not  object  to  a  firm  persuasion  in  any  mind, 
that  it  is  right,  provided  the  point  be  one  on  which  it 
is  competent  to  decide.  I  do  not  object,  noiu^  to  the 
use  of  the  phrase — as  a  phrase  of  great  emphasis  and 
energy — "  I  know,  or  I  feel,  or  I  am  sure,"  that  a  cer- 
tain doctrine  is  true.  But  when  any  persons  profess 
to  use  this  expression  of  confidence  literally  and  accu- 
rately ;  when  they  hold  this  their  assurance,  as  a  spe- 
cific and  triumphant  distinction  ;  when  they  claim  to 
be  superior  to  others  on  such  ground,  and  would  at- 
tempt to  overawe  and  abash  modest  and  thoughtful 
men,  by  such  arrogant  and  irrational  pretensions  to 
infallibility,  I  think  it  a  proper  occasion  for  applying 
the  language  of  the  apostolic  rebuke,  and  telling  them 
that  they  "  know  not  what  they  say,  nor  whereof  they 
affirm."  They  quite  mistake  the  subject  and  subject- 
matter  of  which  they  are  speaking  ;  and  I  have  only 
to  remind  them  that  it  is  believing  that  they  w^ere  talk- 
ing about,  not  knoiving. 

The  principle  must  be  a  very  poor  one  too,  that  works 
so  poorly  in  practice ;  that  destroys  itself,  indeed,  the 
moment  it  is  brought  to  its  application.  If  different 
classes  of  Christians  will  say,  modestly,  and  no  matter 
how  solemnly,  that  they  believe  that  they  are  right ;  and 
yet  will  concede  so  much  to  human  frailty  as  to  admit, 
that  they  may  be  wrong  in  some  measure  ;  then,  their 
respective  claims  do  not  destroy  each  other  entirely, 


44  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

nor  destroy  the  common  faith.  But  if  every  class  will 
have  it  that  it  knoios  itself  to  be  right,  and  knows 
everything  differing  from  it  to  be  wrong ;  what  a  pic- 
ture of  presumptuous,  distracted  and  self-destroying 
churches  is  presented  to  us  ?  Here  is  the  Calvinist, 
that  knows  he  is  right ;  and  the  Arminian  knows  he 
is  right ;  and  the  UniversaUst  knows  he  is  right ;  and 
the  Swedenborgian  has  his  full  measure  of  the  same 
comfortable  knowledge ;  and  the  Presbyterian  and 
Episcopalian,  and  the  Methodist  and  Baptist,  are  each 
and  all,  possessed  of  the  same  undoubting  assurance. 
Are  all  right,  then,  in  the  points  in  which  they  differ  ? 
No  ;  that  is  impossible.  To  what,  then,  does  this 
vaunted  distinction  of  knoiving,  amount  ?  To  nothing 
at  all.  That  cannot  be  a  distinction  which  appertains 
to  all  classes,  to  individuals,  that  is  to  say,  of  all  classes. 
To  what,  then,  does  the  knowing  itself  amount  ?  I 
answer  once  more,  to  nothing  at  all.  For  it  is  clear, 
that  all  this  knowing  cannot  be  knowledge.  It  may 
be  confidence,  and  presumption,  and  positive  assertion, 
but  it  is  not  knowledge. 

But  a  man  may  say,  "  It  is  a  matter  of  experience, 
and  therefore  I  know  it."  What,  let  me  ask,  is  a 
matter  of  experience  ?  Not  that  any  theological  sys- 
tem is  true,  not  that  any  doctrine  is  revealed,  not  that 
any  one  mode  of  church  order  is  divinely  ordained. 
These  are  matters  of  inference,  not  of  experience. 
"  Nay,  but  my  meaning,"  says  the  confident  votary, 
"  is,  that  my  faith  or  my  mode  of  w^orship  has  had 
such  an  effect  upon  me ;  it  has  so  delightfully  wrought 
itself  into  my  experience,  that  I  am  sure  it  must  be 
the  true  doctrine,  the  true  way.  Heaven  has  thus 
sealed  it  to  me  in  absolute  certainty."  If  only  one 
class  could  say  this,  it  might  amount  to  something 
like  presumptive  proof.     But  the  truth  is,  that  every 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  45 

form  of  faith  and  discipline  can  present  just  such  in- 
stances. It  is  particularly  true,  that  recent  conversion 
to  a  religious  system  is  apt  to  produce  this  kind  of 
vivid  experience.  There  is  not  a  faith  in  Christendom, 
Catholic  or  Protestant,  strict  or  liberal,  but  has  con- 
verts ready  to  proclaim  its  efficiency.  The  argument 
proves  too  much,  legitimately  to  prove  anything. 

This  arrogance,  too,  is  as  unseemly  as  it  is  baseless. 
If  the  subject  did  not  forbid  it,  yet  the  sense  of  imper- 
fection ought  to  restrain  a  frail,  fallible,  erring  human 
being  from  such  presumption  ;  presumption  too,  which 
is  commonly  strong,  in  proportion  as  the  doctrine  is 
dark  and  doubtful,  and  the  mind  is  readier  to  decide 
than  to  examine.  Such,  indeed,  was  not  the  spirit  of 
Newton,  "  child-like  sage."  Such  was  not  the  spirit  of 
Socrates,  who,  against  the  all-knowing  sophists  of  hig 
day,  was  accustomed  to  say  that  he  professed  to  know 
nothing ;  that  he  was  only  a  seeker  after  knowledge. 
Such,  in  fine,  has  never  been  the  spirit  of  deep  study 
and  patient  thought.  But  assurance  rises  up  to  speak, 
where  modesty  is  silent ;  and  a  rash  judgment,  to  pro- 
nounce, where  patient  inquiry  hesitates ;  and  ignorance 
to  say,  "  I  know,"  where  real  knowledge  can  only  say, 
"I  believe." 

Such  was  not  the  spirit  of  the  author  of  the  "Saints' 
Rest,"  nor  of  the  good  old  English  time.  "  I  am  not 
so  foolish,"  says  Baxter,  "  as  to  pretend  my  certainty 
to  be  greater  than  it  is,  merely  because  it  is  a  dishonour 
to  be  less  certain.  My  certainty,  that  I  am  a  man,  is 
before  my  certainty,  that  there  is  a  God.  My  certainty, 
that  there  is  a  God,  is  before  my  certainty,  that  he  re- 
quireth  love  and  holiness  of  his  creatures.  My  certainty 
of  this  is  greater  than  my  certainty  of  the  life  of  rewards 
and  punishments  hereafter.  My  certainty  of  that  is 
greater  than  my  certainty  of  the  endless  duration  of 


46  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

it,  and  the  immortality  of  individual  souls.  My  cer- 
tainty of  the  Deity  is  greater  than  my  certainty  of 
the  Christian  faith.  My  certainty  of  the  Christian 
faith,  in  its  essentials,  is  greater  than  my  certainty  of 
the  perfection  and  infallibiUty  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
And  my  certainty  of  that  is  greater  than  my  certainty 
of  many  particular  texts,  and  so  of  the  truth  of  many 
particular  doctrines,  and  of  the  canonicalness  of  some 
certain  books." 

Let  me  add  a  word  of  caution,  however,  if  it  can  be 
necessary,  in  closing  this  part  of  my  discourse.  Because 
I  maintain  that  absolute  certainty  does  not  properly 
attach  to  matters  of  faith,  let  it  not  by  any  means  be 
regarded  as  a  fair  inference,  that  the  great  points  of 
our  Christian  faith  are  to  be  held  as  if  they  were  doubt- 
ful matters.  A  believer  is,  by  definition,  one  whom 
belief,  and  not  doubt,  characterizes.  And  the  Christian 
belief,  I  hold  to  be  founded  on  such  evidence,  as  to  be 
put  "beyond  all  reasonable  doubt."  This  phrase,  "be 
yond  reasonable  doubt,"  is  held  in  the  law,  to  describe 
the  nearest  approach  to  certainty,  that  is  compatible 
with  the  nature  of  moral  evidence  ;  to  describe  such  a 
degree  of  confidence  as  lays  a  just  foundation  for  deci- 
sion and  action.  Such  I  hold  to  be  the  nature  and 
strength  of  the  Christian  faith. 

I  have  thus  attempted  to  show  that  uncertainty  or 
doubt,  greater  or  less  in  degree,  is  a  part  of  our  dispen- 
sation, implied  in  that  declaration  of  the  Apostle,  that 
we  know  only  in  part ;  that  it  is  implied  in  the  very 
nature  of  moral  evidence  ;  implied  in  faith  ;  and  there- 
fore that  it  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  monstrous,  nor  to 
be  magnified  into  undue  importance,  nor  to  be  made  a 
reason  for  rejecting  the  system  of  faith  ;  unless,  in  the 
second  place,  it  can  lay  claim  to  a  strength  and  con- 
sistency, and  an  escape  from  difficulties,  which  will 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELICUOUS    BELIEF.  47 

give  it  manifest  superiority  over  the  system  of  faith ; 
a  superiority  which,  on  great  points,  is  denied  to  it  by 
its  utter  insufficiency  to  improve,  exalt,  strengthen  and 
bless  human  nature  ;  and,  finally,  I  have  insisted,  that, 
on  the  other  hand,  no  rational  system  of  faith,  when 
it  goes  beyond  the  principles  of  absolute  conscience 
and  consciousness,  can  pretend  to  be  freed  from  doubt, 
can  pretend  to  absolute  certainty ;  and  hence,  that  the 
confident  assurance  of  the  fanatic  is,  in  this  matter,  as 
much  out  of  place,  as  the  overweening  self-complacency 
of  the  skeptic. 

IV.  But  after  all,  this,  to  some,  may  be  a  very  un- 
satisfactory view  of  the  subject.  They  may  even  think 
it  injurious  and  unsafe.  I  must  not  leave  the  subject, 
therefore,  without  attempting,  in  the  last  place,  to  show 
the  utility  of  that  moral  sj^stem  and  mental  discipline, 
under  which,  as  I  contend,  we  are  placed.  That  we 
are  placed  under  it,  is,  indeed,  in  my  view,  a  sufficient 
answer  to  all  objections.  But  it  may  still  be  asked, 
why  is  it  so  ?  Why  is  there  one  shadow  or  shade  left 
on  our  path  ?  Why,  instead  of  shining  brigliter  and 
brighter,  can  it  not  be,  from  the  beginning  one  track 
of  brightness  ?  Why  are  we  not  made  just  as  sure  of 
every  moral  truth,  that  is  interesting  and  important  to 
us,  as  we  are  that  we  behold  the  light  of  the  sun  ? 
Why,  in  fine,  is  not  moral  evidence,  like  mathematical 
demonstration,  put  beyond  every  possibility  of  doubt  ? 

It  might,  indeed,  be  answered  that  the  very  nature 
of  the  subjects,  and  of  the  mind,  makes  the  difference. 
And  I  believe  that  this  is  true.  At  any  rate,  it  is  in- 
conceivable to  us  that  moral  deductions  should,  by  any 
possibility,  have  been  made  as  definite  and  certain  as 
those  of  the  most  exact  science.  But  I  am  not  obliged 
to  rest  the  answer  on  this  apparent  necessity  of  the 
case  alone ;  and  I  proceed  to  offer,  in  further  defence 


48  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

of  that  moral  constitution  of  things  under  which  our 
minds  are  trained  up,  the  consideration  of  utiUty. 

I  say,  then,  that  it  is  a  useful  system,  a  good  system ; 
the  best  system  by  us  conceivable.  If  I  am  asked  why 
we  have  not  vision,  instead  of  promise,  to  guide  us ; 
why  we  have  not  assurance,  instead  of  trust ;  why  not 
knowledge,  instead  of  faith  ;  I  answer,  because  it  is  not 
expedient  for  us.  Probably  we  could  not  bear  vision, 
or  it  would  be  too  much  for  our  contentment  or  our 
attention  to  the  objects  around  us ;  but  I  do  not  rest 
on  a  probability.  I  appeal  to  what  is  certain  also ;  and 
that  is,  that  assurance  and  knowledge  would  lessen 
the  trial  of  virtue  and  of  the  intellect ;  and  therefore 
would  hinder  their  improvement. 

To  give  an  illustration  of  my  meaning,  and  especially 
to  show  why  it  may  not  be  expedient  that  we  should 
have  an  actual  vision  of  a  future  life  ;  it  is  not  best  that 
children,  for  instance,  should  be  introduced  to  an  actual 
knowledge  or  experience  of  the  circumstances,  allure- 
ments, or  interests  of  maturer  life.  That  view  of  the 
future  might  too  much  dazzle  or  engross  them,  might 
distract  them  from  the  proper  business  of  their  educa- 
tion, and  might,  in  many  ways,  bring  a  trial  upon  their 
young  spirits,  beyond  their  power  to  bear.  Therefore, 
they  look  through  a  veil  upon  the  full  strength  of  hu- 
man passions  and  interests.  Human  love  and  hate, 
and  hope  and  fear,  human  ambition  and  covetousness, 
and  splendour  and  beauty,  they  "  see  through  a  glass 
darkly."  Just  as  little  might  we  be  able  in  this  child- 
hood of  our  being,  to  have  the  realities  of  a  future 
scene  laid  open  to  us. 

Again,  for  an  illustration  of  the  general  advantages 
of  inquiry  instead  of  certainty  ;  if  a  man  were  to  travel 
around  the  globe,  it  might  be  far  more  agreeable  and 
easy  for  him,  to  have  a  broad  and  beaten  pathway,  to 


THE    NATURE    CF    RELIGIOUS    EELIEF.  49 

have  marked  and  regular  stages,  to  be  borne  onward 
in  a  chariot  under  an  experienced  and  safe  conduct, 
and  to  have  deputations  from  the  nations  he  passed 
through,  to  wait  upon  him,  and  to  inform  him  exactly 
of  every  thing  he  wished  to  know.  But  would  such  a 
grand  progress  be  as  favourable  to  his  character,  to  his 
mental  cultivation  or  moral  discipline,  to  his  enterprise 
and  good  sense  and  hardihood  and  energy,  as  it  would 
be  to  thread  out  his  w^ay  for  himself;  to  overcome  ob- 
stacles and  extricate  himself  from  difficulties ;  to  take, 
in  other  words,  the  general  chart  of  his  travels,  and  to 
gain  an  acquaintance  with  men  and  things,  by  inquiry 
and  observation,  and  reasoning  and  experience?  Such 
is  the  course  ordained  for  the  moral  traveller  in  passing 
through  this  world.  And  certainly  it  is  better  for  him  ; 
better  that  he  should  draw  conclusions,  though  he 
make  mistakes ;  better  that  he  should  reason  upon 
probabilities,  though  he  sometimes  err ;  better  that  he 
should  gain  wisdom  from  experience,  though  the  way 
be  rough  and  sometimes  overshadowed  with  uncertain- 
ty, than  that  he  should  always  move  on,  upon  the 
level  and  easy  and  sure  path  of  knowledge. 

Apply  the  same  question  to  the  ordinary  course  of 
life.  A  youth  might  always  have  a  tutor,  or  a  mentor 
to  direct  him.  And  then  he  would  always  be  in  the 
condition  of  one  w^io  knew  what  to  do,  of  one  who 
had  no  doubt.  Yes,  and  he  woidd  alicays  he  a  child. 
Can  any  one  doubt  that  it  would  be  more  conducive 
to  his  improvement,  to  his  courage  and  resolution,  to 
his  Y/isdom  and  worth,  that  he  should  be  obliged  to 
reason,  to  employ  his  pov/ers,  to  be  tried  with  conflict- 
ing views  of  subjects,  to  find  out  his  own  way,  to  grow 
wise  by  his  own  experience,  and  to  have  light  break 
in  upon  his  path  as  he  needs  it,  or  as  he  seeks  it? 
But  such  is  the  actual  course  of  life ;  and  similar  to 


50  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

this,  is  the  course  which  the  mind  must  take  in  the  re- 
Hgious  hfe. 

Nor  is  this  all.  It  appears  to  me  that  there  is  one 
further,  more  specific,  and  more  important  use  of  the 
trials  of  faith ;  and  that  is,  that  they  urge  us  to  the 
most  strenuous  self-purification  and  fervent  piety.  I 
believe  that  it  is  an  express  law  of  religious  progress, 
that  the  advancement  and  strength  of  our  faith,  other 
things  being  equal,  are  always  in  proportion  to  the 
fervour  and  purity  of  our  religious  affections.  This 
law  results  from  the  very  nature  of  the  subjects  to 
which  it  relates.  Our  faith  in  Christianity,  for  in- 
stance, and  in  a  future  life,  is  not  a  deduction  of  ab- 
stract reasoning,  irrespective  of  ovuselves  and  of  the 
character  of  God,  nor  of  the  nature  of  the  communica- 
tion as  compared  with  them.  Belief  is  grounded^  in 
part,  on  certain  views  of  our  nature  and  wants,  and 
on  certain  views  of  the  character  of  God.  Now,  none 
but  a  pure  and  spiritual  mind  can  estimate  the  trans- 
cendent worth  of  its  own  nature,  or  can  so  love  God,  as 
to  entertain  a  just  view  of  his  love  to  us,  and  to 
hope  all,  that  the  filial  mind  will  hope  from  him.  Self- 
purification,  therefore,  is  an  essential  part  of  the  pro- 
gress, to  light  and  certainty. 

Li  this  progress,  not  a  few  have  arrived  to  the  very 
confines  of  the  land  of  vision.  Their  faith  has  become 
scarcely  less  than  assurance.  Invisible  things  have 
not  only  become  the  great  realities,  as  they  are  to  all 
men  of  true  faith  ;  but  they  have  become,  as  it  were, 
almost  visible ;  there  is  a  presence  of  God,  felt  and 
almost  seen,  in  all  nature  and  life;  there  is,  in  the 
heart,  an  assurance,  a  feeling  of  heaven  and  immor- 
tality. So  it  is  oftentimes  with  the  good  man  in  the 
approach  to  death  ;  the  veil  of  flesh  is  almost  rent  from 
him;  the  shadows  of  mortal  imperfection  are  disap- 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF.  51 

pealing ;  the  threshold  of  heaven  is  gained ;  and  beam- 
ings from  the  ever-bright  regions,  fill  his  soul  with 
their  blessed  light.  Then  it  is,  that  it  is  hard  to  return 
to  life ;  to  pass  again  beneath  the  sliadow ;  to  feel  the 
cold,  dull  realities  of  life  effacing  the  impressions  of 
heavenly  beauty  and  glory.  This  is  sometimes  looked 
upon,  I  know,  as  a  kind  of  hallucination,  a  visionary 
rapture  ;  and  so  it  sometimes  may  be  ;  but  the  truth 
is,  that  in  the  purified  mind,  it  is  the  result  of  principles 
in  accordance  with  the  strictest  reason.  The  explana- 
tion is,  that  such  a  mind  is  prepared  to  receive  the  full 
and  entire  impression  of  the  objects  of  faith  ;  the  light 
of  heaven  is  indeed  around  that  mind,  because  it  is  as 
an  image  pure  and  polished  and  bright  to  reflect  the 
light  of  heaven. 

True  faith  is,  indeed^  a  great  and  sublime  quality. 
It  is  greater,  I  am  persuaded,  than  it  is  commonly  ac- 
counted to  be,  much  as  it  is  exalted,  and  lauded  in  religi- 
ous discourses.  It  is  sometimes  lauded,  indeed,  at  the 
expense  of  reason.  It  is  often  so  represented  as  if  its 
sublimity  consisted  in  its  being  a  mystical  quality,  in 
its  superiority  to  works,  to  the  labours  of  duty,  to  the 
exercise  of  the  quiet  and  humble  virtues.  To  the 
hearer  of  such  representations,  it  often  seems  as  if  this 
glory  and  charm  of  faith  lay  in  a  sort  of  visionary  peace 
of  mind,  obtained  without  any  reference  to  the  culture 
of  the  mind  or  of  the  heart.  But  no  ;  the  very  reverse 
of  this  is  the  truth.  Faith  is  a  great  and  sublime 
quality,  because  it  is  founded  in  eternal  reason ;  be- 
cause it  is  a  patient  and  faithful  inquirer,  and  not  a 
hasty  and  self-confident  rejector,  not  an  idolizer  of  its 
own  fanciful  and  visionary  suggestions  of  doubt.  It  is 
great  too,  because  it  is  moral ;  because,  as  an  Apostle 
declares,  it  works  by  love,  and  purifies  the  heart ;  be- 
cause it  is  an  elevation  of  the  soul  towards  the  purity 


52  THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 

and  glory  of  the  only  and  independently  great  and 
glorious  Being.  It  is  great,  moreover,  and  in  fine,  be- 
cause it  is  a  principle  of  perpetual  advancement.  It 
does  not  write  down  its  creed,  as  if  it  could  never  go 
beyond  that ;  as  if  that  were  its  standard  and  its  limit ; 
as  if  that  were  the  sum  and  the  perfection  of  all  that  it 
could  ever  receive.  No ;  it  is  a  sublime  principle, 
because  it  takes  hold  of  the  sublimity  of  everlasting 
progress.  When  it  reaches  a  brighter  sphere  ;  when  it 
no  longer  knows  in  part,  but  knows  as  it  is  known ; 
when  its  contemplation  has  become  actual  vision,  and 
its  deductions  have  risen  to  assume  the  certainty  and 
take  the  place  of  first  principles ;  then  will  it,  on  the 
basis  of  these  first  principles,  proceed  to  still  farther 
deductions.  Still  and  ever  will  the  fields  of  inquiry  lie 
before  it ;  far  and  for  ever  before  it.  Onward  and  on- 
ward will  they  spread,  beneath  other  heavens,  to  other 
horizons;  bright  regions,  leading  to  yet  brighter  re- 
gions ;  boundless  worlds  for  thought  to  traverse,  beyond 
the  track  of  solar  day :  where — where  shall  its  limit 
be  ?  What  eye  can  pursue  its  flight  through  the  in- 
finitude of  a'^;es  ! 

Christian !  wouldst  thou  make  that  boundless,  that 
glorious  career  thine  own  ?  Then  be  faithful  to  the 
light  that  now  shines  around  thee.  Sink  not  to  rest 
or  slumber,  beneath  the  passing  shadows  of  doubt. 
To  sink,  to  sleep,  is  not  thy  destination,  but  to  wake, 
to  rise.  Rise  then  to  the  glorious  pursuit  of  truth; 
connect  with  it  the  work  of  self-purification ;  open  thy 
mind  to  heavenly  hope ;  aspire  to  the  life  everlasting ! 
Count  it  not  a  strange  thing  that  thou  hast  difficulties 
and  doubts.  Well  has  it  been  said,  that  he  who  never 
doubted,  never  believed.  Shrink  not  and  be  not  afraid, 
when  that  cloud  passeth  over  thee.  Through  the 
cloud,  still  press  onward.    Only  be  assured  of  this,  and 


THE    NATURE    OF    RELIGIOUS    BELIEF. 


53 


with  this  assurance  be  of  courage;  God  made  thee  to 
believe.  Without  faith,  the  ends  of  thy  being  cannot 
be  accomplished,  and  therefore,  it  is  certam  that  he 
made  thee  to  believe.  In  perfect  confidence,  then,  say 
this  with  thyself;  "I  am  sure  that  I  shall  believe;  ^^ 
that  is  necessary  for  me,  I  shall  believe;  m  the  faith- 
ful and  humble  use  of  my  faculties,  I  am  assured  that 
I  shall  come  to  this  result.  I  fear  not  doubt;  I  fear 
not  darkness;  doubt  is  the  way  to  faith,  andda^ness 
is  the  way  to  light."  Come,  holy  light!  come, blessed 
faith!  and  cheer  every  humble  seeker  with  joy  un- 
speakable and  full  of  glory !  . 

And  it  loill  come  to  every  true  and  trusting  heart. 
Why  do  I  say  this?     Because,  I  still  repeat,  I  know 
that  God  made  our  nature  for  faith,  and  virtue,  and 
improvement.    Why  should  it  be  difficult  to  see  this  ? 
And  are  not  skepticism  and  sin  and  the  process  of 
moral  deterioration;    are  they  not  misery  and  dark- 
ness and  destruction  to  our  nature?   Look  at  the  young 
tree  of  the  forest.    Are  you  not  sure  that  God  made  it 
to  o-row?     And  can  you  doubt  that  he  made  your 
moral  nature,  to  grow  and  flourish  ?    But  how  does  he 
make  that  tree  to  grow?     By  pouring  perpetual  sun- 
shine upon  it?     No;  he  sends  the  storm  and  the  tem- 
pest upon  it;  the  overshadowing  cloud  lowers  upon  its 
wavino-top;  and  its  branches  wrestle  with  the  rude 
elements.     So  it  is  with  human  faith.     Amidst  storm 
and  calm,  amidst  cloud  and  sunshine  ahke,  it  rises 
and  rises,  stronger  and  stronger;  till  it  is  transplanted 
at  length,  to  the  fair  clime  of  heaven;  there  to  grow 
and  blossom,  amidst  everlasting  Ught,  in  everlastmg 
beauty. 


NOTE. 

I  HAVE  met  in  Professor  Stuart's  Miscellanies,  just  published, 
(see  Appendix,  p.  205-6)  with  the  following  (to  me)  very  sur- 
prising comment,  not  only  upon  the  language  of  the  foregoing 
article,  but  upon  the  motives  of  the  writer  :  surprising,  because 
1  as  little  suspected  in  my  relations  with  my  former  Instructor  in 
Biblical  studies  as  in  my  own  conscious  integrity,  any  ground  for 
such  causeless  wrong.  In  a  notice  of  Mrs.  Dana's  admirable 
Letters,  Professor  Stuart  says  : — 

"  On  p.  71  she  has  a  long  extract  from  Dr.  Dewey,  of  New 
York,  in  which  he  asserts  that  the  Unitarians  believe  in  the 
Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost ;  in  the  atonement  as  a  sacrifice,  a 
propitiation ;  in  human  depravity,  in  regeneration,  in  the  doctrine 
of  election,  and  in  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments. 
On  the  part  of  such  a  man  as  Dr.  Dewey  I  can  call  this  nothing 
but  gross  deception.  He  knows  well,  although  this  lady-cham- 
pion does  not,  that  there  is  not  a  single  one  of  these  doctrines, 
according  to  the  usual  sense  attached  to  them  by  all  theologians 
of  any  name,  which  Unitarians  admit,  and  which  indeed  they  do 
not  violently  oppose.  The  artifice  of  Dr.  Dewey  consists  in 
employing  an  entirely  new  set  of  definitions."  And  then,  after 
speaking  of  the  well-known  and  acknowledged  difference  between 
the  Calvinistic  and  Unitarian  construction  of  these  doctrines,  he 
adds — "  The  worst  of  the  case  is,  that  he  (Dr.  D.)  knows  this 
to  be  so  ;  and  yet  he  holds  out  these  lures  before  the  public.  *  * 
It  is  an  unworthy — a  degrading  artifice  to  practise  thus  upon  the 
credulity  or  ignorance  of  his  uninstructed  hearers  or  readers. 
It  merits  (what  it  will  be  certain  sooner  or  later  to  receive)  the 
scorn  of  every  upright  and  honest  man." 

To  this  language,  which  I  do  not  wish  to  characterize,  the 
article  may  be  quietly  left,  to  reply  for  itself.  Throughout,  as 
the  reader  must  see,  a  discrimination  is  studiously  made,  between 
the  Orthodox  and  the  Liberal  construction  of  the  terms  in  ques- 
tion. So  far  from  my  professing  to  hold  them  in  the  Calvinistic 
and  Trinitarian  sense  ;  that  is  precisely  what  is  denied.     There 


NOTE  . 


is  nowhere  any  bald  statement  of  a  creed,  as  Professor  Stuart 
lays  it  down  for  me  ;  there  is  no  such  sentence  as  he  professes  to 
quote  •  but  the  subjects  mentioned,  are  taken  up  in  succession; 
and  at  every  step  the  qualification  is  distinctly  made,  that  we 
receive  what  the  words,  as  we  understand  them,  mean  in  the 
Scriptures,  and  not  what  they  mean  in  the  popular  creeds.     In 
the  very  outset,  the  reader  will  perceive,  if  he  will  turn  to  the 
paragraph  on  p.  5-6,  that  I  argue  for  the  propriety  of  our  using 
some  of  these  terms  more  freely  than  we  do,  though  in  a  sense 
different  from  the  Orthodox  use,  because  they  are  Scripture  terms. 
Indeed,  if  they  had  been  used  without  any  express  qualification, 
if  they' had  been  recited  as  a  bare  creed,  does  not  the  very  posi- 
tion of  the  writer  as  a  Unitarian,  obviously  qualify  them  ;  and 
would  not  any  man,  on  a  moment's  reflection,  say—"  Of  course 
he  uses  them  in  a  sense  of  his  own  1"     And  does  Professor  Stuart 
really  suppose  that  we  are  anxious  to  be  thought  or  called  irini- 
tarians  and  Calvinists  T     The  case  speaks  for  itself.     The  allega- 
tion is  absurd.     It  is  scarcely  possible  for  me,  seriously  to  con- 
sider it.     I  can  hardly  persuade  myself  that  Prof.  Stuart  himself 
believes  what  his  language  implies.     And  most  sincerely  do  I 
wish,  from  the  respect  which  I  have  always  felt  and  expressed 
for  him,  that  the  charge  might  bear  no  more  serious  aspect  any 
way,  than  it  does  towards  myself. 

The  only  pertinent,  not  to  say  decent  charge,  would  be— not 
that  of  disingenuousness ;  intentional,  mean,  base,  contemptible 
disino-enuousness— but  of  impropriety,  in  the  use  of  the  terms 
with  which  I  have  set  forth  "  the  Unitarian  Belief."  If  this  were 
the  allegation,  I  should  then  ask— Does  Prof.  Stuart  mean  to  say 
that  only  he  and  those  who  think  with  him,  have  a  right  to  de- 
fine their  faith,  in  Scripture  language?  This  would  be  a  new 
'kind  of  claim.  This  would  be  an  exclusion  that  would  drive  us 
beyond  the  pale  of  English  speech.  I  had  thought  that  speech 
and  Bible  speech  were  common  property.  He  might  as  well 
say,  "  These  persons  profess  to  believe  in  God  and  Christ,  m  re- 
ligion and  holiness,  and  they  are  guilty  of  gross  deception." 
What  language,  I  pray,  are  we  to  use— believing  as  we  do? 
We  do  beUeve  in  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 
This  is  the  great,  primitive.  Christian  creed.  As  such  it  is  in- 
troduced in  the  proselyte's  ordinance  of  baptism.  In  baptism  ice 
continually  use  it.  Must  we  not  be  allowed  to  say  that  we  be- 
lieve in  what  those  words  mean  ?     We  do  believe  in  the  Atone- 


66  NOTE. 

ment,  the  Sacrifice,  the  Propitiation,  as  we  understand  the  New 
Testament  to  teach  them  ;  and  in  the  same  sense,  we  believe  in 
human  depravity,  regeneration,  election,  and  a  future  state  of  re- 
wards and  punishments.  And  can  we  not  say  that  we  believe  in 
them,  without  incurring  the  charges  of  "  gross  deception,"  of 
"  artifice,"  and  of  a  conduct  which  "  merits  the  scorn  of  all  up- 
right and  honest  minds"? 

These  theological  common-places — these  polemic  accusations 
— alas  !  one  is  tempted  to  exclaim,  in  what  school  of  morality  is 
it,  that  they  yet  find  a  home?  In  what  atmosphere  of  religious 
sentiment  is  it,  that  is  ■  breathed  the  fierce  and  fiery  breath  of 
such  terrible  accusations  ?  If  it  were  Christian,  one  could  hardly 
wonder  at  the  Infidelity,  that  should  seek  a  better  school. 


CURSORY   OBSERVATIONS 


ON     THE 


QUESTIONS   AT  ISSUE  BETWEEN  ORTHODOX  AND 
LIBERAL  CHRISTIANS.* 


I. 


ON     THE     TRINITY. 

What  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity?  It  is,  that 
the  Ahnighty  Father  is  God;  that  Jesus,  whom  he 
sent  into  the  world,  is  God;  and  that  the  Holy  Spirit, 
represented  also  as  a  separate  agent,  is  God  ;  and  yet 
that  these  three,  "  equal  in  power  and  glory,"  are  but 
one  God.  This  is  what  the  advocate  of  the  Trinity 
says.  But  now  let  me  ask  him  to  consider  what  it 
is,  that  he  thinks ;  not  what  are  the  words  he  uses, 
but  what  are  his  actual  conceptions.  If  he  conceives 
of  only  one  God,  one  Infinite  mind ;  and  then  if  all  that 
he  means  by  the  Trinity  is,  that  the  Saviour  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  partook,  in  some  sense,  of  the  nature  of 
God;  this  is  nothing  materially  different  from  what 
we  all  believe.  If  he  means  that  the  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit,  are  only  representations  of  the  same  God,  acting 

*  I  mean  no  offence  by  this  designation  of  the  parties.  If  the 
words,  Orthodox  and  Liberal,  be  taken  in  a  literal  sense,  then,  of 
course,  I  claim  to  be  orthodox,  and  I  do  not  deny  that  others  are 
liberal.  But  I  take  the  terms  as  they  are  used  in  common  parlance  ; 
and  I  prefix  them  to  this  series  of  articles,  because  no  other  cover  the 
whole  ground  of  the  discussion.  In  any  view,  if  others  assume  the 
title  of  Orthodox,  I  think  they  cannot  charge  us  with  presumption, 
if  we  adopt  the  title  of  Liberal. 


58  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

in  three  characters,  then  he  is  not  a  Trinitarian,  but  a 
Sabellian.  But  if  he  goes  farther,  and  attempts  to 
grasp  the  real  doctrine  of  the  Trinity ;  if  he  attempts 
to  conceive  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Spirit,  as 
possessing  each  a  distinct  existence,  consciousness  and 
vohtion,  as  holding  counsel  and  covenant  with  each 
other  ;  then,  though  he  may  call  these  Three  one, 
though  he  may  repeat  it  to  himself  all  the  day  long, 
that  they  are  but  one;  yet  does  he  actually  conceive 
of  them  as  three  agents,  three  beings,  three  Gods? 
The  human  mind,  I  aver,  is  so  constituted,  that  it  can- 
not conceive  of  three  agents,  sustaining  to  each  other 
the  relations  asserted  by  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
without  conceiving  of  them  as  three  Gods. 

Let  the  reader  keep  his  mind  free  from  all  confusion 
on  this  point,  arising  from  Christ's  incarnation,  or 
adoption  of  human  nature.  Before  that  event,  the 
distinction  is  held  by  Trinitarians  to  be  just  as  marked 
as  it  is  now.  Then  it  was  that  the  Father  covenanted 
with  the  Son.  Then  it  was,  that  the  Son  offered  to 
assume  human  nature,  and  not  the  Father.  Then  it 
was,  that  the  Father  promised  to  the  Son  that  he 
should  "  see  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied." 
Then  it  was  that  the  Father  sent  the  Son  into  the 
world.  Is  it  possible  for  any  human  mind  to  contem- 
plate these  relations,  without  conceiving  of  those  be- 
tween whom  they  existed,  as  two  distinct,  self-con- 
scious Beings  ?  I  aver  that  it  is  not.  The  Father, 
by  supposition,  must  have  known  that  he  was  not  the 
Son.  The  Son  must  have  known  that  he  was  not 
the  Father.  Two,  who  speak  to  one  another,  who 
confer  together;  the  one  of  whom  commissions,  the 
other  is  commissioned;  the  one  of  whom  sends  the 
other  into  tlie  world ;  these  two  are,  to  every  human 
mind  so  contemplating  them,  and  are  in  spite  of  itself, 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  59 

two  beings.  If  not,  then  there  is  nothing  in  the  uni- 
verse ansAvering  to  the  idea  of  two  beings.  We  all 
partake  of  a  common  humanity  ;  and  it  might  just  as 
well  be  maintained  that  all  men  are  one  being,  as 
that  the  three  in  the  Trinity  are  one  being. 

In  simple  truth,  I  do  not  see  why  any  reader  on  this 
subject  need  go  farther  than  this.  Till  something 
credible  is  offered  to  be  proved  ;  till  something  better 
than  absolute  self-contradiction  is  proposed  as  a  mat- 
ter of  belief;  who  is  bound  to  attend  to  the  argument  ? 

I  mean  no  discourtesy  nor  injustice  to  the  Trinita- 
rian, unless  argument  shall  be  thought  such.  I  know 
that  he  supposes  himself  to  hold  a  theory,  which  es- 
capes from  the  charge  of  self-contradiction.  But  so 
long  as  he  says  that  the  Father  sent  the  Son,  and  that 
these  two  are  one  and  the  same  being,  I  believe  that 
he  does  not  and  cannot  escape  from  it.  I  know  that 
he  professes  to  believe  in  one  God ;  and  in  truth,  in 
all  his  practical  and  devotional  thoughts ;  v/henever 
he  prays  to  the  Father  through  the  Son,  he  is,  and 
his  mind  compels  him  to  l^e,  virtually  a  Unitarian. 
And  this  doubtless  is,  and  always  has  been,  the  state 
of  the  general  mind.  Practical  Unitarianism  has  al- 
ways been  the  general  faith  of  Christendom.  Even 
when,  as  in  the  Roman  Church,  and  sometimes  in  the 
Protestant,  men  have  prayed  to  Jesus  Christ,  it  would 
be  f  und,  if  their  thoughts  could  be  confessed,  that 
they  have  forgotten  the  Father  for  the  time,  and  their 
error  has  not  consisted  in  Tritheism,  but  in  clothing 
the  being,  called  Jesus,  with  the  attributes  of  sole 
Divinity.  Still,  though  erring,  they  have  been  practi- 
cal Unitarians.  But  scholastic  men  have  always  been 
weaving  theories,  at  variance  Avith  the  popular  and 
effective  behef.  Half  of  the  history  of  philosophy  might 
be  written  in  illustration  of  this  single  point.     Such  a 


60  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

theory,  I  conceive,  is  the  Trinity.  It  has  existed  in 
studies,  in  creeds,  in  theses,  in  words ;  but  not  in  the 
actual  conceptions  of  men,  not  in  their  heartfelt  belief. 
From  the  days  when  TertuUian  complained  in  the 
second  century,  that  the  common  people  would  not 
receive  this  doctrine,  and  down  through  all  the  ages 
of  seeming  assent,  and  to  this  very  day,  I  believe  that 
it  has  ever  been  the  same  dead  letter.  And  when 
Christianity  has  fairly  thrown  off  this  incumbrance,  as 
I  believe  it  will,  I  have  no  doubt  that  many  will  say, 
what  not  a  few  are  saying  now,  "We  never  did  believe 
in  the  Trinity ;  we  always  felt  that  the  Son  was  inferior 
to  the  Father  who  sent  him." 

But  how  then.  I  may  be  asked,  does  it  come  to  pass, 
that  this  doctrine  is  honestly  and  earnestly  maintained 
by  a  great  many  able  and  learned  men,  to  be  accordant 
with  the  teachings  of  Scripture  ?  Because,  I  answer, 
that,  on  a  certain  theory  of  interpretation,  there  is  a 
great  deal  of  proof  for  it  from  Scripture ;  Avhile  upon 
another  and  true  principle,  I  firmly  believe  that  there 
is  none  at  all. 

Let  me  invite  the  reader's  attention,  for  a  few  moments, 
to  the  consideration  of  this  point ;  the  true  principle  of 
interpretation.  My  own  conviction  is,  that  it  settles  the 
whole  question ;  but  at  any  rate,  I  cannot,  in  this  cursory 
view  which  I  am  taking,  go  over  the  ground  of  the 
v\  hole  argument ;  and  therefore  I  shall  confine  myself 
to  the  most  material  point  at  issue. 

We  must  all  have  seen  by  this  time — indeed,  I  think 
the  whole  Christian  world  must  have  perceived,  how 
impossible  it  is  to  settle  any  question  from  the  Scrip- 
tures, by  bare  textual  discussion.  Texts  may  be  arrayed 
against  texts,  and  have  been  for  ages,  and  might  be, 
from  any  mass  of  writings  like  the  Scriptures ;  they 
might  be,  and  have  been,  thus  arrayed  by  the  parties 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  61 

to  every  religious  controversy,  with  very  little  tendency 
to  produce  conviction,  so  long  as  the  true  principle  of 
their  interpretation  was  disregarded.  So  long  as  texts 
are  considered  by  themselves  alone,  considered  as  inde- 
pendent passages,  uncontrolled  by  any  such  principle, 
one  text  is  as  good  as  another ;  and  thus  Christian 
sects  have  presented  the  strange  anomaly, — the  wonder 
of  observers,  the  scorn  of  infidels — of  being  directly  at 
issue  on  the  clearest  points  of  Christian  doctrine,  all 
armed  with  proof  passages,  all  equally  confident,  and 
all  with  equal  assurance  condemning  each  other. 

What  is  to  account  for  this  phenomenon  ?  There 
are  other  causes,  indeed,  but  I  am  persuaded  that  the 
main  cause  lies  in  the  peculiarity  of  treatment  to  which 
the  Scriptures  have  been  subjected.  There  is  doubt- 
less a  superstructure  of  passion,  prejudice,  pride  and 
worldly  interest;  but  resting  ostensibly,  as  it  does,  on 
the  Scriptures,  there  must  be  some  error  touching  the 
very  interpretation  of  them. 

Let  me  now^  more  distinctly  state,  what  are  the  two 
principles  or  theories  of  interpretation,  by  which  it  is 
proposed  to  explain  the  language  of  Scripture  on  this 
subject.  For  the  Trinitarian  has  his  theory,  his  hu- 
manly devised  theory,  and  his  reasoning,  and  what  he 
considers  his  rational  principle  of  exposition,  as  much 
as  the  Unitarian.  The  difference  is  not,  thousrh  it  is 
often  alleged,  that  the  Unitarian  rehes  more  upon 
reasoning,  independent  of  Scripture  ;  but,  as  I  conceive, 
that  he  rehes  upon  a  more  rational,  a  more  natural, 
and  a  really  sounder  principle  of  interpretation.  The 
Trinitarian  says, — ''Here  are  two  classes  of  passages, 
— those  w^hich  describe  an  inferior,  and  those  which 
describe  a  superior  nature.  We  receive  both  classes 
without  admitting  any  qualification,  or  limitation  of 
sense  in  either.  One  class  of  texts  ascribes  human 
6 


62  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

qualities  to  Jesus ;  therefore,  he  is  man ;  another  as- 
cribes divine  works  and  offices ;  therefore,  he  is  God ; 
and  we  dare  not  explain  them  into  what  we  might 
imagine  to  be  a  consistency  with  each  other,  as  we 
should  any  other  history,  concerning  any  other  person. 
We  receive  the  contrasted  portions  of  this  history  just 
as  they  stand ;  holding  it  to  be  not  our  business  to  ex- 
plain, but  only  to  believe." 

By  this  theory,  undoubtedly,  the  Trinity  can  be 
proved.  By  this  theory  a  double  nature  in  Christ  can 
be  proved.  And  by  this  theory,  do  I  seriously  aver  that 
Transubstantiation,  Anthropomorphism,  and  irrecon- 
cilable contradictions  in  the  divine  nature  can  be 
proved.  Transubstantiation;  the  doctrine  that  the 
sacramental  bread  and  wine  are  the  real  body  and 
blood  of  Christ;  for  while,  in  one  class  of  passages, 
these  elements  are  called  bread  and  wine ;  in  another, 
doth  not  our  Saviour  say,  "this  is  my  body — this  is  my 
blood?"  Anthropomorphism;  for  while  we  are  taught 
that  God  is  a  spirit,  is  he  not  said  to  have  hands,  eyes ; 
to  walk  on  the  earth,  <fec.  ?  Irreconcilable  contradic- 
tions in  his  nature ;  for  while  we  are  taught  that  God 
is  unchangeable,  is  he  not  represented  as  repenting, 
that  he  had  made  man ;  repenting,  that  he  had  made 
Saul  king?  Upon  what  principle  is  it,  that  such 
monstrous  conclusions  are  avoided?  Upon  a  principle, 
I  answer,  that  is  fatal  to  the  Trinitarian  theory  of  in- 
terpretation. It  is  the  principle  that  words  are  not  to 
be  taken  by  themselves  in  the  Bible ;  tliat  limitations 
and  qualifications  in  their  meaning  must  be  admitted, 
in  order  to  make  any  sense ;  that  the  Scriptures  are,  in 
this  respect,  to  be  interpreted  like  other  books;  that 
when  human  language  is  adopted  as  the  instrument 
of  a  divine  communication,  it  may  fairly  be  presumed 
that  it  is  subject  to  the  laws  of  that  instrument;  and 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  63 

that  no  other  piinciple  of  criticism  can  save  the  Bible, 
or  any  other  book,  from  the  imputation  of  utter  absur- 
dity and  folly. 

This  I  understand  to  be  the  Unitarian  theory  of  in- 
terpretation. The  reader  will  perceive  at  once  that 
just  this  difference  of  theory  will  bring  out  precisely 
the  difference  of  results,  that  characterize  these  two 
classes  of  believers.     Which,  then,  is  the  true  theory? 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  case  speaks  for  itself;  that 
all  common  sense,  all  usage,  all  criticism,  all  tolerable 
commentary  on  the  Bible,  sufficiently  declares  which  is 
the  right  principle. 

But  let  us  appeal  to  undeniable  authority ;  that  of 
the  sacred  teachers  themselves ;  that  of  the  Bible  in- 
terpreting itself. 

For  the  application  of  our  principle  of  interpretation 
to  the  very  subject  before  us,  we  have  the  authority  of 
Jesus  Christ  himself;  and  the  application  is  as  clear 
and  decisive,  as  the  appeal,  with  every  Christian,  must 
be  final  and  ultimate.  I  allude  to  that  most  extraor- 
dinary passage,  in  John  x.  30 — 36;  most  extraordi- 
nary I  mean  in  reference  to  this  controversy :  and  I 
propose  to  make  it  the  subject  of  considerable  com- 
ment and  argument. 

What  is  the  question,  in  the  passage  here  referred 
to  ?  I  answer,  the  very  question,  which  is  now  virtu- 
ally before  us ;  did  Jesus  claim  to  be  God?  What  was 
the  language  of  our  Saviour?  "God  is  my  Father:  I 
and  my  Father  are  one."  What  was  the  accusation 
of  the  Jews?  "Thou  blasphemest,  and,  being  a  man, 
makest  thyself  God:"  the  very  allegation  on  which 
Trinitarianism  is  founded.  It  was  once  a  cavil :  it  is 
now  a  creed.  And  now  I  ask,  in  the  name  of  reason 
and  truth  and  Scripture,  how  does  our  Saviour  treat  it? 
His  answer,  be  it  remembered,  in  the  first  place,  is  a 


64  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

solemn  and  absolute  denial  of  the  allegation,  that  he 
had  made  himself  God  !  "  Jesus  answered  them,  is  it 
not  written  in  your  law,  I  said  ye  are  gods  ?  If  he 
called  them  Gods  to  whom  the  word  of  God  came,  and 
the  Scripture  cannot  be  broken  ;  say  ye  of  him  whom 
the  Father  hath  sanctified  and  sent  into  the  world, 
Thou  blasphemest,  because  I  said,  I  am  the  Son  of 
God  ?"  Our  Saviour  had  used  strong  language  con- 
cerning himself.  He  had  said,  "As  the  Father  knoweth 
me,  even  so  know  I  the  Father ;"  referring,  however, 
as  I  suppose,  not  to  the  extent,  but  the  certainty  of 
the  knowledge.  He  had  said,  "  I  and  my  father  are 
one.  Then  the  Jews  took  up  stones  to  cast  at  him  ;" 
they  accused  him  of  blasphemy;  they  said,  "thou 
makest  thyself  God."  Jesus  denies  that  the  language 
he  had  used  warrants  the  inference  they  drew  from  it. 
This  is  the  second  point.  He  denies  their  inference. 
He  clearly  implies,  moreover,  that  stronger  language 
still  would  not  Avarrant  the  inference.  He  tells  the 
cavilling  Jews,  that  even  those  "  to  Avhom  the  word  of 
God  came  "  had  been  "  called  gods."  And  then,  so  far 
from  declaring  himself  to  be  God,  he  speaks  of  himself 
as  one  whom  God  "  had  sanctified  and  sent  into  the 
world  ;"  and  as,  on  that  account,  entitled  to  speak  of 
himself  in  exalted  terms. 

And  yet,  how  astonishing  is  it,  we  may  observe,  by 
the  by,  that  this  very  language,  "  I  and  my  Father  are 
one,"  concerning  which,  and  much  stronger  language 
too,  he  had  declared  its  insufficiency  to  prove  him  God ; 
this  very  language,  I  say,  and  other  similar  phraseology, 
is  constantly  quoted  to  prove  the  Supreme  Deity  of  the 
Son  of  God  !  Words,  once  caught  up  by  gainsayers, 
and  by  them  wrested  into  a  charge  against  our  Saviour, 
of  assuming  Divinity,  and  denied  by  him  to  be  any 
legitimate  proof  of  such  an  allegation,  now  help  to 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  66 

support  the  faith  of  multitudes  in  this  very  allegation, 
as  a  portion,  and  a  most  essential  portion,  of  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine ! 

I  say  that  our  Saviour  appeals  to  a  principle  of 
interpretation.  Those,  in  ancient  times,  "  to  whom  the 
word  of  God  came,"  were  men,  ordinary  men  ;  and 
when  they  were  called  gods,  this  language  was  limited 
in  its  force  by  their  known  character.  No  one  could 
think  of  taking  this  language  for  what  it  meant  by 
itself  considered,  and  without  any  qualification.  But 
our  Saviour  was  an  extraordinary  personage,  and  he 
argues  that  words  of  much  loftier  import  might  be 
applied  to  him,  without  furnishing  any  warrant  for  the 
inference,  that  he  was  God  ;  and  he  absolutely  contra- 
dicts the  inference. 

Let  us  now  apply  in  another  way  the  reasoning  with 
which  our  Saviour  confounded  the  Jews. 

I  suppose  it  will  be  admitted  that  the  words  "  I  and 
my  Father  are  one,"  do  not  prove  our  Saviour  to  be 
God ;  since  he  himself  expressly  disallows  the  inference. 
Now,  is  there  any  language  in  the  Bible  concerning 
Christ,  that  is  stronger  than  this  ?  Is  there  any  of  all 
the  proof  texts,  that  is  stronger  ?  I  confess  that  I  know 
of  none.  This  is  the  very  language  of  the  popular 
creed  ;  not  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  two  Gods, 
hut  that  they  are  one.  And  so  exactly  does  it  express 
the  Orthodox  belief,  that  notwithstanding  our  Saviour's 
disclamation,  it  is  constantly  used  to  convey  the  idea 
that  he  was  God.  His  disclamation,  however,  settles 
the  matter  entirely.  And  I  suppose  that  an  intelligent 
reasoner  on  the  Trinitarian  side,  would  say,—"  It  is 
true  the  words  here  used  do  not  prove  Jesus  to  be 
God.  Still,  however,  he  may  be  God.  He  was  reason- 
ing with  the  Jews  on  a  particular  charge.  The  charge 
was,  that  he  had,  by  the  language  he  used,  made 
6* 


66  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

himself  God.  He  simply  denies  that  this  particular 
language  warrants  their  inference.  "  Is  not  this, 
however,  at  the  least,  a  very  extraordinary  supposition  ? 
It  makes  our  Saviour  say  with  himself,  "  True,  I  am 
God,  and  being  so,  I  have  used  languag-e  very  naturally 
expressive  of  that  fact.  However,  I  can  reason  it 
away  with  these  people,  on  the  ground  of  their  own 
Scriptures,  and  I  will  do  so.  I  am  God,  indeed  ;  but  I 
will  deny  this  inference  of  the  Jews,  though  it  amounts 
to  the  exact  truth.  I  will  deny  it,  though  I  thereby 
mislead  them  altogether  and  infinitely,  as  to  my  true 
character."  This,  I  say,  would  be  our  Saviour's 
reasoning  with  himself  on  the  Trinitarian  hypothesis. 
But  the  truth  is,  this  supposition,  improper  and  incred- 
ible as  it  is,  will  not  save  the  doctrine.  Because  this 
lang-uaoce,  which  our  Saviour  declares  insufficient  to 
prove  him  God,  is,  in  fact,  as  strong  as  any  language 
that  the  advocates  of  that  doctrine  adduce.  If  this 
language  does  not  fairly  prove  him  to  be  God^  then  no 
language  in  the  Bible  does. 

Let  us  suppose,  to  put  this  in  another  form,  that  the 
New  Testament  in  all  its  doctrinal  parts  ;  that  is  to 
say,  that  the  Epistles  had  been  written,  and  all  had 
been  completed  before  our  Saviour's  death ;  and  that 
our  Trinitarians  could  have  said  to  him  after  the 
manner  of  the  Jews,  "Thy  disciples  whom  thou  hast 
commissioned  to  declare  the  truth,  make  thee  to  be 
God."  I  conceive  that  Jesus  might  have  given  the 
same  answer  as  he  did  to  his  Jewish  accusers.  He 
would  say,  "  No  ;  in  all  writings  it  is  common  to  speak 
of  men  according  to  their  distinction  ;  nor  is  there  any 
need,  on  the  principles  of  ordinary  interpretation  and 
sense,  of  guarding  and  restraining  the  natural  language 
of  admiration  and  love.  The  ancient  Jews  were  called 
gods,  because  the  word  of  God  came  to  them.     And 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  67 

I,  on  account  of  my  Messiahship^  may  properly  be 
spoken  of.  and  spoken  of  in  that  character^  much  more 
strongly." 

But,  to  bind  the  argument  more  closely,  and  to  render 
it,  as  I  think,  incontrovertible,  let  me  add,  that  the 
matter  which  I  now  state  is  not  a  matter  of  supposi- 
tion, but  of  fact.  Jesus  is  spoken  of,  and  that  fre- 
quently, in  his  simple  character  of  Messiah  ;  that  is 
to  say,  as  inferior,  as  confessedly  inferior,  as  an  official 
person  he  is  spoken  of  as  strongly  as  he  is  anywhere. 
Observe  the  following  language — "  For  by  him  were 
all  things  created  that  are  in  heaven  and  earth,  visible 
and  invisible,  whether  they  be  thrones  or  dominions, 
or  principalities  or  powers,  all  things  were  created  by 
him  and  for  him,  and  he  is  before  all  things,  and  by 
him  all  things  consist."  There  is  no  stronger  language 
than  this.  And  yet,  for  all  this,  Jesus  is  represented 
as  dependant  on  the  good  pleasure  of  God.  "  For — 
for  it  pleased  the  Father  that  in  him  should  all  ful- 
ness dwell."  I  suppose  this  to  be  that  moral  creation, 
that  creating  anew  of  many  souls,  which  Jesus  by  his 
doctrine  has  effected,  together  with  that  influence  upon 
the  visible  kingdoms  of  the  world,  which  his  doctrine 
has  unquestionably  produced.  Again :  we  read  of  Jesus 
Christ  as  being  "far  above  principality  and  power,  and 
might  and  dominion,  and  every  name  that  is  named, 
not  only  in  this  world,  but  in  that  which  is  to  come ;" 
and  again,  I  say,  there  is  no  stronger  language  than 
this.  But  it  is  expressly  said,  that  God  "set  him 
above  all  principahty,"  &c.  How  directly  are  we  led 
back  from  these  passages,  to  our  Saviour's  principle  of 
interpretation  !  And  as  if  there  should  be  no  doubt 
about  the  subordinate  and  temporary  character  of  this 
distinction,  high  as  it  was,  we  are  expressly  told,  that 
"  when  the  end  shall  come ;"  when,  according  to  the 


68  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

Trinitarian  hypothesis,  we  expect  to  see  Jesus  ascend 
to  his  primeval  dignity  as  God;  when  "all  things  shall 
be  subdued  unto  him,"  lo  !  "  then  shall  he  be  subject 
unto  him  that  put  all  things  under  him ;  that  God  may 
be  all  in  all."  And  as  if  to  warrant  the  very  principle 
of  interpretation,  on  which  I  am  insisting;  as  if  to  show 
that  nothing,  that  is  said  of  the  glory  of  our  Saviour, 
is  to  be  taken  in  derogation  from  the  supremacy  of 
God,  it  is  said  in  this  very  connection,  "  But  when  it  is 
said,  all  things  are  put  under  him,  it  is  manifest  that 
He  is  excepted  who  did  put  all  things  under  him."  As 
if  it  were  said ;  nay  it  is  said,  that  nothing  written  con- 
cerning the  greatness  of  Jesus  is  to  bring  into  question 
the  unrivalled  supremacy  of  God. 

And  let  me  add,  that  this  provides  us  with  an  an- 
swer to  the  only  objection  that  stands  in  our  way.  It 
may  be  said,  that  there  are  still  passages,  whose  force 
is  not  controlled  by  any  express  qualification,  I  an- 
swer that  it  is  nevertheless  fairly  controlled  by  the 
general  sense  of  the  book.  The  certain  truth,  that 
there  is  but  one  God ;  the  constant  ascription  of  that 
supremacy  to  the  Father,  the  constant  declaration, 
tliat  Jesus  owed  everything  to  God,  justly  limits  the 
sense  of  those  passages  which  ascribe  to  the  Saviour 
a  lofty  distinction.  This  is  according  to  the  usage  of 
all  writings.  Suppose  that  when  the  biographer  had 
said  of  Bonaparte,  that  "  his  footstep  shook  the  Con- 
tinent," or  of  Mr.  Pitt,  that  he  "struck  a  blow  in 
Europe,  that  resounded  through  the  world,"  or  the 
poet,  of  Milton, — 

"  He  passed  the  flaming  bounds  of  space  and  time, 
The  living  throne,  the  sapphire-blaze  ;" 

suppose,  I  say,  that  he  immediately  added,  and  in 
every  sucli  instance  added,  that  he  did  not  mean  to  be 
taken  literally — that  he  did  not  mean  that  the  person- 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  69 

age  in  question  was  a  demi-god;  could  anything  be 
more  unnatural  and  unnecessary?  Were  any  writ- 
ings ever  composed  upon  this  plan  ? 

What  then  is  the  conclusion  at  which  we  arrive  ? 
The  very  objection  which  we  are  considering,  in  fact, 
gives  up  the  whole  argument.  For  it  is  admitted  by 
this  objection,  that  if  the  qualification  had  been  con- 
stantly introduced ;  that  is  to  say,  if  every  time  that 
any  lofty  distinction  had  been  ascribed  to  Jesus,  it  had 
been  expressly  said  that  "God  gave  him  this,"  that 
"God  had  set  him  there :"  it  is  admitted,  I  say,  that  by 
this  constantly  repeated  qualification,  the  whole  Trini- 
tarian argument  would  have  been  completely  over- 
thrown. Is  it  possible  then,  for  the  Trinitarian  expo- 
sitor, interpreting  the  Bible  on  the  same  principle  that 
he  does  other  books,  to  maintain  his  argument?  If 
he  does  maintain  it,  I  fearlessly  assert,  that  he  gives  up 
the  principle.  The  moment  he  feels  the  Trinitarian 
ground  strong  beneath  him,  that  moment  he  abjures 
the  principle  in  his  exposition ;  that  moment  he  begins 
to  say,  "  It  is  profane  to  interpret  the  Scriptures,  as  we 
do  other  books,  the  Scripture  biography,  as  we  do  other 
biographies." 

The  fact  is,  and  I  must  assert  it,  that  the  Trinitarian, 
with  all  his  assumptions  of  exclusive  reverence  for  the 
Bible,  does  not  adhere  to  the  Bible  as  his  opponent  does. 
If  he  would  vindicate  his  claim,  I  should  be  glad  to 
see  a  little  more  regard  for  Scripture  usage  in  his 
doxologies  and  ascriptions.  From  all  pulpits,  at  the 
close  of  almost  every  prayer,  may  be  heard,  on  any 
Sunday,  formulas  of  expression  like  these ;  nowhere 
to  be  found  in  the  Bible  ;  "  And  to  the  Father,  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  be  all  honour  and  glory :"  "  To  the 
holy  and  ever-blessed  Trinity ;  one  God,  the  Father, 


70  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  be  equal  and  undivided  honours 
and  praises." 

And  yet  those  who  pass  upon  us  such  unscriptural 
theories,  as  we  think  them,  and  are  constantly  sway- 
ing the  public  mind,  by  using"  such  confessedly  unscrip- 
tural language,  are,  at  the  same  time,  perpetually 
charging  us  with  rejecting  the  Bible  and  relying  on 
our  presumptuous  reasonings,  and  with  leaning,  and 
more  than  leaning,  to  infidelity. 

I  repeat,  in  close,  that  the  question  between  us  is  a 
question  of  interpretation.  It  is  a  question  of  "  what 
saith  the  Scripture  ?"  It  amounts  to  nothing  in  view 
of  this  question,  to  tell  me,  that  for  many  centuries  the 
church  has,  in  the  body  of  it,  believed  this  or  that  doc- 
trine. The  church,  by  the  confession  of  us  all,  has 
believed  many  errors,  for  many  centuries.  It  is  worse 
yet,  contemptuously  or  haughtily  to  sa)^,  that  it  is  un- 
likely, any  great  or  new  truth  in  religion  is  now  to  be 
found  out.  Such  a  principle  would  stop  the  progress 
of  the  age.  Such  a  principle  would  have  crushed  the 
Reformation.  Neither  is  our  doctrine  ncAV,  nor  is  it 
unhonoured,  so  far  as  human  testimony  can  confer 
honour.  It  was  the  doctrine,  as  we  firmly  believe,  of 
the  primitive  church.  It  has  been  held  by  many  good 
men  ever  since.  And  when  you  come  upon  English 
ground ;  when  you  retrace  the  bright  lineage  of  our 
English  worthies,  to  whom  do  all  eyes  turn  as  the 
brightest  in  that  line?  Whose  names  have  become 
household  words,  in  all  the  dwellings  of  a  reading  and 
intelligent  community?  I  answer,  the  names  of 
Newton,  and  Locke,  and  Milton.  And  yet  Newton, 
who  not  only  read  the  stars ;  and  Locke,  who  not  only 
penetrated  with  patient  study  the  secrets  of  the  mind ; 
and  Milton,  who  not  only  soared  into  the  heaven  of 
»oetry,  and  "passed  the  sapphire  blaze,  and  saw  the 


ON    THE    TRINITY.  71 

living  throne  ;"  all  of  whom  read  their  Bibles  too,  and 
wrote  largely  upon  the  Scriptures ;  all  these,  after 
laborious  investigation,  concurred  in  rejecting  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity.  What  these  men  believed,  is  not 
to  be  accounted  of  mushroom  growth.  They  were 
men  not  of  parts  and  genius  only,  but  men  of  solid  and 
transcendant  acquisitions  and  ever-during  fame.  I 
would  not  name  them  in  the  spirit  of  vain  and 
foolish  boasting.  But  I  do  say,  and  I  would  urge 
this  consideration  particularly ;  I  do  say,  that  the  ex- 
traordinary circumstance,  that  these  three  men  have 
been  as  distinguished  for  their  study  of  the  Bible,  as 
they  have  been  otherwise  distinguished  among  the 
great  and  learned  men  of  England,  should  lead  every 
man  to  pause,  before  he  rejects  a  doctrine  which  they 
believed.  Much  more  does  it  become  men  of  inferior 
parts  and  little  learning,  to  abstain  from  pouring  out 
contempt  and  anathemas  upon  a  doctrine  which  New- 
ton, and  Locke,  and  Milton  believed. 

It  is  to  little  purpose,  indeed,  to  lift  up  warnings  and 
denunciations,  and  to  awaken  prejudice  and  hostility 
against  the  great  doctrine  on  which  Unitarianism  is 
built,  the  simple  Unity  of  God ;  and  the  entire  infe- 
riority, yet  glorious  distinction,  of  Jesus,  as  his  Son  and 
Messenger.  This  doctrine  professes  to  stand  securely 
on  the  foundation  of  Scripture.  Argument,  therefore, 
not  passion,  must  supply  tlie  only  effectual  weapons 
against  it.  If  this  doctrine  be  wrong,  may  God  speedily 
show  it !  If  it  be  right,  he  will  defend  the  right.  Con- 
cerning all  improper  opposition,  we  might  say  to  its 
opponents,  in  the  words  of  Gamaliel,  "  Let  it  alone :  for 
if  this  counsel,  or  this  work,  be  of  men,  it  will  come  to 
nought :  but  if  it  be  of  God,  ye  cannot  overthrow  it ; 
lest  haply  ye  be  found,  even  to  fight  against  God." 


II. 


ON     THE     ATONEMENT. 

For  1  determined  not  to  know  anything  among  you,  save  Jesus 
Christ  and  him  crucified. — 1    Cor.  ii.  2. 

The  preeminence  thus  assigned  to  one  subject  of 
Christian  teaching,  the  sufferings  of  Jesus,  must  com- 
mand for  it  our  serious  attention.  It  is  true  that  Paul 
did  7iot  mean  to  say,  that  he  would  not  speak  of  any- 
thing but  the  passion  of  Christ;  for  he  did  speak  of 
many  other  things.  But  it  is  quite  clear  that  he  did 
give  to  this  subject,  in  the  Christian  system,  an  im- 
portance, preeminent ;  predominating  over  all  others. 

Why  did  he  so?  Why  is  the  death  of  Jesus  the 
highest  subject  in  Christianity  ?  Why  is  the  cross  the 
chiefest  emblem  of  Christianity  ?  Why  has  something 
like  Paul's  determination  always  been  realized  in  the 
Christian  church ;  to  know  nothing  else?  Why  has 
it  been  celebrated,  as  nothing  else  has  been  celebrated? 
Why  has  a  holy  rite  been  especially  ordained  to  show 
forth  the  death  of  Christ  through  all  time  ?  The  brief 
answer  to  these  questions  is,  that  the  substance,  the 
subject-matter  of  Christianity,  is  the  character  of 
Christ,  as  the  Saviour  of  men ;  and  that  the  grandest 
revelation  of  his  character  and  purpose  was  made  on 
tlie  cross.     Of  this  revelation  I  am  now  to  speak. 

In  entering  upon  this  subject  I  feel  one  serious  dif- 
ficulty. It  has  taken  such  hold  of  the  superstition  of 
mankind,  that  it  is  difficult  to  present  it  in  its  true, 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  78 

simple,  natural  and  affecting  aspects.  For  this  reason, 
I  shall  not  attempt  to  engage  your  minds  in  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  a  doctrinal  discussion.  I  cannot  dis- 
cuss this  solemn  theme  in  a  merely  metaphysical  man- 
ner. I  cannot  contemplate  a  death,  and  least  of  all 
the  death  of  the  Saviour,  only  as  a  doctrine.  It  is  to 
me,  I  must  confess,  altogether  another  kind  of  influ- 
ence. It  is  to  me,  if  it  is  anything,  power  and  gran- 
deur ;  it  is  something  that  rivets  my  eye  and  heart ;  it 
is  a  theme  of  admiration  and  spiritual  sympathy ;  it 
leads  me  to  meditation,  not  to  metaphysics ;  it  is  as  a 
majestic  example,  a  moving  testimony,  a  dread  sacri- 
fice, that  I  must  contemplate  it.  I  see  in  it  a  death- 
blow to  sin ;  I  hear  the  pleading  of  the  crucified  One 
for  truth  and  salvation,  beneath  the  darkened  heavens 
and  amidst  the  shuddering  earth ! 

I  mean  to  say,  that  all  this  is  spiritual  and  practical. 
It  amazes  me,  that  this  great  event,  which  is  filling  all 
lands  and  all  ages,  should  be  resolved  altogether,  all 
gathered  and  stamped  into  a  formula  of  faith.  It  is 
every  way  astonishing  to  me,  that  such  a  speculative 
use  should  have  been  made  of  it ;  that  suffering  should 
have  been  seized  upon  as  a  subject  for  metaphysical 
analysis ;  that  the  agony  of  the  Son  of  God  should 
have  been  wrested  into  a  thesis  for  the  theologian; 
that  a  death  should  have  been  made  a  dogma ;  that 
blood  should  have  been  taken  to  write  a  creed ;  that  Cal- 
vary should  have  been  made  the  arena  of  controversy. 
That  the  cross,  whereon  Jesus,  with  holy  candour  and 
meekness,  prayed  for  his  enemies,  saying,  "  Father,  for- 
give them,  for  they  know  not  what  they  do ;"  that  the 
cross  should  have  been  made  a  rack  of  moral  torture 
for  his  friends,  whereon,  in  all  the  valleys  and  upon  all 
the  hills  of  Christendom,  they  have  been  crucified  by 
unkindness  and  exclusion ;  is  there  another  such  con- 
7 


74  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

tradiction ;  is  there  another  such  phenomenon  to  be 
found,  m  all  the  strange  history  of  the  world?  There 
have  been  martyrdoms  recorded  in  the  world's  great 
story;  but  Avhen  before  were  martyrdoms  wrought  into 
sharp  and  reproachful  metaphysics  ?  There  have  been 
fields  drenched  with  righteous  blood ;  tliere  have  been 
lowly  and  lonely  valleys,  like  those  of  Piedmont  and 
Switzerland,  where  the  sighs  and  groans  of  the  crushed 
and  bleeding  have  risen  and  echoed  among  the  dark 
crags  that  surrounded  them  ;  but  Avho  ever  thought  of 
building  up  these  dread  testimonies  of  human  suffering 
and  fortitude,  into  systems  of  doctrinal  speculation? 

Let  me  not  be  misunderstood.  Li  the  train  of  the 
world's  history,  as  I  follow  it,  I  meet  at  length  Avith  a 
being,  marked  and  singled  out  from  all  others.  I  read, 
in  the  Gospel,  the  wonderful  account  of  the  most  w^on- 
derful  personage,  that  ever  appeared  on  earth.  Nothing, 
in  the  great  procession  of  ages,  ever  bore  any  com- 
parison with  the  majestic  story  that  now  engages  my 
attention.  I  draw  near  and  listen  to  this  being,  and  he 
speaks  as  never  man  spake.  By  some  strange  power, 
w^hich  I  never  so  felt  before,  he  seems  as  no  other  mas- 
ter ever  did,  to  speak  to  me.  I  follow  him,  as  the  course 
of  his  life  leads  me  on.  I  become  deeply  interested, 
more  than  as  for  a  friend,  in  everything  he  says,  and 
does,  and  suffers.  I  feel  the  natural  amazement  at  the 
resistance  and  hatred  he  meets  with.  I  feel  a  rising 
glow  in  my  cheek,  at  the  indignities  that  are  heaped 
upon  him.  I  say  with  myself,  "  Surely,  God  will  inter- 
pose for  him !"  I  hear  him  speak  obscurely  of  a  death 
by  violence ;  but,  like  the  disciples,  I  cannot  receive  it. 
I  look,  rather,  that  some  horses  and  chariots  of  fire, 
shall  come  and  bear  him  up  to  heaven.  But  the  scene 
darkens  around  him ;  more  and  more  frequently  fall 
from  his  lips,  the  sad  monitions  of  coming  sorrow ;  he 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  75 

prepares  a  feast  of  friendship  with  his  disciples,  but  he 
tells  them  that  it  is  the  last ;  he  retires  thence  to  the 
shades  of  Gethsemane ;  and  lo  !  through  those  silent 
shades  comes  the  armed  band ;  he  is  taken  with  wicked 
hands;  he  is  borne  to  the  Judgment-Hall;  he  is  in- 
vested with  a  bloody  crown  of  thorns,  and  made  to 
bear  his  cross  amidst  a  jeering  and  insulting  multitude ; 
he  is  stretched  upon  that  accursed  tree ;  he  expires  in 
agony.  Oh  !  where  are  now  the  hopes,  that  he  would 
do  some  great  thing  for  the  world  !  He  seemed  as  one, 
who  would  save  the  world,  and  lo  !  he  is  crucified  and 
slain  !  He  seemed  to  hold  in  his  bosom  the  great  re- 
generative principle ;  he  knew  what  was  in  man  and 
what  man  wanted ;  he  appeared  as  the  hope  of  the 
world ;  and  where  now  is  that  hope  ?  Buried,  in- 
tombed,  quenched  in  the  dark  and  silent  sepulchre. 
All  is  over ;  all,  to  my  worldly  view,  is  ended.  I  wander 
away  from  the  scene  in  hopeless  despair.  I  fall  in 
company,  as  the  narrative  leads  me  on,  with  two  of 
the  scattered  disciples  going  to  Emmaus.  And  as  we 
talk  of  these  things,  one  joins  us  in  our  walk,  and  asks 
us  what  are  these  sad  communings  of  ours.  And  we 
say,  "Art  thou  only  a  stranger  in  Jerusalem,  and  hast 
not  known  the  things  which  are  come  to  pass  there  in 
these  days  ?  And  he  saj^s,  what  things  ?  And  we 
answer,  concerning  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  Then  ex- 
pounds he  to  us  the  Scriptures ;  and  says,  ought  not 
Christ  to  have  suffered  these  things  and  to  enter  into 
his  glory  ?  "  In  fine,  he  reveals  himself  unto  us,  and 
then  vanishes  away.  And  we  say,  "  Did  not  our  hearts 
burn  within  us,  while  he  talked  with  us  by  the  way, 
and  while  he  opened  to  us  the  Scriptures  ?  " 

In  short,  it  is  at  this  point,  that  a  new  view  enters 
my  mind  of  the  sufferings  of  Jesus.  The  worldly 
views  all  pass  away ;  the  worldly  views  of  death  and 


76  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

defeat,  of  ignominy  and  ruin  ;  and  I  see  that  through 
death  it  was,  that  Jesus  conquered.  I  see  that  his 
dying,  even  more  than  his  hving,  is  a  ministration  of 
power,  and  hght,  and  salvation  to  the  w^orld.  I  see 
that  that  ignominy  is  glory;  that  those  wounds  are 
fountains  of  healing ;  that  the  cross,  hitherto  branded 
as  the  accursed  tree,  fit  only  for  the  execution  of  the 
vilest  culprits,  has  become  the  emblem  of  everlasting 
honour. 

Now,  therefore,  the  death  of  Jesus  becomes  to  me 
the  one  great  revelation.  I  determine  to  know  nothing 
else ;  nothing  in  comparison  with  it ;  nothing  is  of 
equal  interest.  All  the  glory  of  Christ's  example,  all 
the  graciousness  of  his  purposes,  shines  most  brightly 
on  the  cross.  It  is  the  consummation  of  all,  the  finish- 
ing of  all.  The  epitaph  of  Jesus,  is  the  epitome  of 
Christianity.  The  death  of  Jesus,  is  the  life  of  the 
world. 

Li  saying  this,  I  wish  to  utter  no  theological  dogma, 
which  shall  be  respectfully  received  as  a  mere  dogma. 
I  simply  express  what  is,  upon  my  own  mind,  the  natu- 
ral impression.  I  stand  by  the  cross  of  Jesus  ;  for  no 
intervening  ages  can  weaken  the  power  of  that  mani- 
festation ;  and  what  is  its  language  to  me  ?  I  will 
suppose  myself  to  stand  alone  by  that  cross ;  I  will 
suppose  that  I  have  never  heard  of  any  theological 
systems ;  I  stand  in  the  simplicity  of  the  elder  time, 
before  any  systems  were  invented.  And  what  now  is 
the  first  feeling  that  enters  my  mind,  as  I  gaze  upon 
that  Sufferer  ? 

1.  I  think  I  shall  state  the  natural  impression,  taking 
into  account  all  that  I  have  known  of  Jesus,  Avhen  I  say 
that  the  first  feeling  is,  that  I  am  a  sinner.  It  is  ever 
the  tendency  of  human  guilt,  on  witnessing  any  great 
catastrophe,  to  exclaim,  "  I  am  a  sinner."     But  this  is 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  77^ 

not  a  catastrophe  without  an  explanation.  Let  us  see 
if  my  feeHng  is  not  right.  I  have  heard  all  that  Jesus 
has  said  of  the  supreme  evil,  that  sin  is.  I  have  seen 
how  that  one  conviction  rested  upon  his  mind,  and 
breathed  out  in  all  his  teachings,  that  nothing  beside 
is  comparatively  an  evil.  I  have  seen  that  it  was  on 
this  very  account,  that  he  came  on  a  mission  of  pity 
from  the  Father  of  mercies.  I  have  heard  all  that  he 
has  said ;  my  heart  has  been  probed  by  his  words,  and 
I  involuntarily  exclaim,  as  I  see  him  suspended  on  the 
cross,  "  Ah  !  sinful  being  that  I  am  ;  that  such  an  one 
should  suffer  for  me.  It  is  I  that  deserved  to  suffer  ; 
but  God  hath  made  him  the  propitiation  for  my  sins. 
Could  nothing  else  set  forth  before  me  the  curse  of  sin? 
Could  no  other  hand  bear  the  burden  of  my  redemption  ? 
Truly,  I  have  sinned  against  the  gracious  Father  of 
my  existence  ;  I  always  knew  it ;  I  always  felt  that  I 
had ;  but  how  is  it  shown  to  me  now,  when  the  love 
and  pity  of  the  infinite  Father  appears  in  this ;  that  he 
spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  gave  him  to  die  for  me. 
Oh !  sore  and  bitter  to  abide  are  pains  and  wounds ; 
cherished  in  heaven  are  the  sufferings  of  martyred 
innocence !  how  then  does  every  pain  of  Jesus  awaken 
the  pain  of  conscious  guilt  in  my  mind !  how  does  every 
wound  reveal  a  deeper  wound  in  my  soul !  I  will  re- 
pent me  now,  if  I  never  would  before.  I  will  resist,  I 
can  resist  no  longer.  I  will  be  crucified  to  sin,  and  sin 
shall  be  crucified  to  me.  I  will  bathe  the  cross  of  Jesus 
with  the  tears  of  penitence.  God,  who  hast  interposed 
for  me,  help  me  to  die  daily  unto  sin,  and  to  live  unto 
righteousness !" 

It  is  in  this  connexion,  if  anywhere,  that  we  must 
give  a  few  moments'  attention  to  the  doctrinal  expla- 
nation of  the  atonement.  I  have  indeed  remonstrated 
against  the  gpeculative  use  of  this  subject,  but  the  state 


7^  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

of  the  public  mind  makes  it  necessary,  perhaps,  that 
something  should  be  said  of  the  theory  of  the  atone- 
ment. 

I  understand  this,  then,  to  be  the  state  of  the  ques- 
tion.     Two  leading  views  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ 
divide  the  Christian  world.     The  one  regards  it  as  an 
expedient;  the  other  as  a  manifestation.     According 
to  the  first  view,  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  usually  repre- 
sented either  as  the  suffering  of  a  penalty,  or  as  the 
payment  of  a  debt,  or  as  the  satisfaction  of  a  law.     It 
is  something  that  either  turns  God's  favour  towards  us, 
or  makes  it  proper  for  him  to  show  favour.    It  is  some 
new  element,  or  some  new  expedient  introduced  into 
the  divine  government,  without  which  it  is  impossible 
to  obtain  forgiveness.     This,  I  understand  to  be,  in 
general  and  in  substance,  the  Calvinistic  view.     The 
other  view  regards  the  suffering  of  Christ,  as  simply  a 
manifestation.     It  is  not  a  purchase,  or  procurement, 
but  a  manifestation  of  God's  love  and  pity  and  willing- 
ness to  forgive.     It  is  not  the  enfranchisement,  from 
some  legal  bond,  of  God's  mercy ;  but  the  expression,  the 
out-flowing  of  that  mercy  which  was  forever  free.     It, 
was  a  satisfaction  not  to  the  heart  of  reluctant  justice, 
but  of  abounding  grace.   The  divine  displeasure  against 
sin,  indeed,  was  manifested ;  for  how  costly  was  the 
sacrifice  for  its  removal ;  but  not  a  displeasure  that 
must  burn  against  the  sinner  till  some  expedient  was 
found  to  avert  it. 

Now  the  view  of  manifestation  is  the  one  which  we 
adopt ;  and  certainly  many  of  the  more  modern  Ortho- 
dox explanations  come  to  the  same  thing.  They  still 
proceed,  it  is  true,  upon  the  presumption  that  this  mani- 
festation was  intrinsically  necessary ;  that  sin  could  not 
have  been  forgiven  without  it ;  that  the  authority  of 
God's  law  could  not  have  been  otherwise  upholden.    I 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  79 

certainly  cannot  take  this  view  of  the  subject.  I  can- 
not undertake  to  say  what  it  was  possible  or  proper  for 
the  Almighty  to  do.  I  can  only  wonder  at  the  pre- 
sumption of  those,  who  do  profess  thus  to  penetrate 
into  the  fathomless  counsels  of  the  Infinite  Govern- 
ment. I  read  in  the  Gospel,  it  is  true,  of  a  necessity 
for  the  sufferings  of  Christ ;  but  I  understand  it  to  be 
founded  in  prophecy,  which  must  be  fulfilled ;  founded 
in  the  moral  purposes  of  his  mission ;  founded  in  the 
wisdom  of  God.  I  read,  that  God  is  the  justifier  of  him 
that  believeth  in  Jesus,  of  him  that  is  penitent  and 
regenerate  ;  that  is,  God  treats  him  as  if  he  were  just; 
in  other  words,  shows  favour  to  him ;  bestows  pardon 
and  mercy  upon  him.  And  of  this  mercy  Jesus,  the 
sufferer,  is  the  great  and  all-subduing  manifestation. 

I  cannot  here  go  into  the  details  of  Interpretation. 
It  is  perplexed  by  reasonings  of  the  Apostles  about  the 
relations  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  by  analogies  to  the 
Jewish  sacrifices,  by  the  language  and  speculations  of 
an  ancient  time ;  by  difficulties,  in  short,  that  require 
much  study  and  learning  for  their  clearing  up,  and 
demand  7io  solution  at  th«  hand  of  plain  and  unlearned 
persons,  who  are  simply  seeking  for  their  salvation. 
This  profound  criticism,  in  short,  is  a  subject  for  a 
volume,  rather  than  for  a  sermon. 

But  I  will  present  to  you,  in  accordance  with  a  fre- 
quent practice  of  theologians,  a  single  illustration, 
which,  if  you  will  carry  into  the  New  Testament,  you 
will  see,  I  believe,  that  it  explains  most  of  the  language 
you  will  find  there. 

Suppose,  then,  that  a  father,  in  a  distant  part  of  the 
country,  had  a  family  of  sons,  all  dear  to  him.  Sup- 
pose that  all  of  them,  save  one,  who  remained  at  home 
with  him,  had  wandered  away  into  the  world  to  seek 
their  fortunes,  and  that  in  the  prosecution  of  that  de- 


80  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

sign,  they  had  come  to  one  of  our  cities.  Suppose  that, 
in  process  of  time,  they  yield  to  the  temptations  that 
surround  them,  and  become  dissolute  and  abandoned, 
and  are  sunk  into  utter  misery ;  first  one,  and  then 
another,  till  all  are  fallen.  From  time  to  time,  dark 
and  vague  rumours  had  gone  back  to  their  country- 
home,  that  all  was  not  well ;  and  their  parent  had 
been  anxious  and  troubled.  He  thought  of  it  in  sleep- 
less nights  ;  but  what  could  he  do  ?  He  desired  one 
and  another  of  his  neighbours,  going  down  to  the  great 
city,  to  see  his  sons,  and  tell  him  of  their  estate.  On 
their  return  they  speak  to  him  in  those  reserved  and 
doubtful  terms,  that  sear  a  parent's  heart :  one  mes- 
senger after  another  speaks  in  this  manner  ;  till  at 
length,  evasion  is  no  longer  possible,  and  the  father 
learns  the  dreadful  truth,  that  his  sons  are  sunk  into 
the  depths  of  vice,  debasement,  and  wretchedness. 
Then,  at  last,  he  says  to  his  only  remaining,  and  be- 
loved son,  "Go,  and  save  thy  brethren."  Let  me 
observe  to  you  here,  that  nothing  is  more  common  in 
the  books  of  Divinity,  than  comparisons  of  this  nature ; 
and  that  it  is  not,  of  course,  designed  to  imply  any- 
thing in  such  comparisons  of  the  relative  rank  of  the 
parties.  The  father  says,  "  Go,  and  save  thy  brethren." 
Moved  by  compassion,  that  son  comes  to  the  great  city. 
He  seeks  his  unhappy  brethren  in  their  miserable 
haunts  ;  he  labours  for  their  recovery.  Ere  long,  a 
fearful  pestilence  spreads  itself  in  the  city.  Shall  the 
heroic  brother  desist  from  his  task  ?  No  ;  he  labours 
on  ;  night  and  day  he  labours  ;  till,  in  the  noisome 
abodes  of  vice,  poverty  and  misery,  he  takes  the  infec- 
tious disease,  and  dies.  He  dies  for  the  salvation  of 
his  brethren. 

Now  what  is  the  language  of  this  sacrifice  on  the 
part  of  the  father,  what  is  it  on  the  part  of  the  son,  and 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  81 

what  is  it  to  those  unhappy  objects  of  this  interposi- 
tion? 

On  the  part  of  the  father,  it  was  unspeakable  com- 
passion. It  was  also,  constructively,  an  expression  of 
his  displeasure  against  vice  ;  of  the  sense  he  enter- 
tained of  the  evil  into  which  his  sons  had  fallen.  On 
the  part  of  the  son,  it  was  a  like  conviction  and  com- 
passion, and  a  willingness  to  die  for  the  recovery  of 
his  brethren.  What  would  it  be  to  those  guilty  breth- 
ren ?  What  would  it  be  especially,  if  by  dying  for 
them,  he  recovered  them  to  virtue,  restored  them  to 
their  father's  arms,  and  to  a  happy  life  7  "  Ah  !  our 
brother,"  they  Avould  say ;  "  He  died  for  us  ;  he  died 
that  we  might  live.  His  blood  has  cleansed  us  from 
sin.  By  his  stripes,  by  his  groans,  by  his  pains,  we 
are  healed.  Dearly  beloved  brother  !  we  will  live  in 
memory  of  thy  virtues,  and  in  honour  of  thy  noble 
sacrifice."  Nor,  my  friends,  is  there  one  word  of  reli 
ance  or  gratitude  in  the  New  Testament  applied  to  the 
sacrifice  of  Jesus,  which  persons  thus  circumstanced, 
and  with  a  Jewish  education,  would  not  apply  to  just 
such  an  interposition  as  we  have  supposed.  If,  then, 
we  have  put  a  case  which  meets  and  satisfies  all  the 
Scriptural  language  to  be  explained,  have  we  not  put 
a  case  that  embraces  the  essential  features  of  the  great 
atonement? 

II.  I  have  now  spoken  of  the  relation  of  the  cross 
of  Christ  to  our  sins,  and  to  the  pardon  of  sin.  But 
we  should  by  no  iTieans  have  exhausted  its  efiicacy, 
we  should  by  no  means  have  shown  all  the  reasons  of 
its  preeminence  in  the  Christian  dispensation,  if  we 
were  to  stop  here.  Not  less  practical,  not  less  momen- 
tous is  its  relation  to  our  deliverance  from  sin.  That, 
indeed,  is  its  ultimate  end,  and  pardon  is  to  be  obtained 
only  on  that  condition.     This  idea,  indeed,  has  been 


82  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

essentially  involved  in  what  we  have  already  said; 
but  it  requires  yet  further  to  be  unfolded. 

The  death  of  Jesus  is  the  greatest  ministration  ever 
known  on  earth  to  human  virtue.  It  was  intended 
not  to  be  a  relief  to  the  conscience;  but  an  incentive,  a 
goad  to  the  negligent  conscience. 

It  was  not  meant,  because  Christ  has  died,  that 
men  should  roll  the  burden  of  their  sin  on  him,  and 
be  at  ease ;  but  that,  more  than  ever,  they  should 
struggle  with  it  themselves.  It  was  designed  that  the 
cross  should  lay  a  stronger  bond  upon  the  conscience, 
even  than  the  law.  When  I  look  upon  the  cross,  I 
cannot  indulge,  my  brethren,  in  sentimental  or  theo- 
logic  strains  of  rapture,  over  reliefs  and  escapes  ;  over 
the  broken  bonds  of  legal  obligation  ;  over  a  salvation 
wrought  out /or  me,  and  not  i?i  me  ;  over  a  purchased 
and  claimed  pardon  ;  as  if  now  all  w^ere  easy,  as  if  a 
commutation  were  made  with  justice  ;  the  debt  paid, 
the  debtor  free ;  and  there  were  nothing  to  do,  but  to 
rejoice  and  triumph.  No ;  I  should  feel  it  to  be  base 
and  ungenerous  in  me,  thus  to  contemplate  sufferings 
and  agonies  endured  for  my  salvation.  The  cross  is 
a  most  majestic  and  touching  revelation  of  solemn  and 
bounden  duty.  It  makes  the  bond  stronger,  not 
weaker.  It  reveals  a  harder,  not  an  easier  way  to  be 
saved.  That  is  to  say,  it  sets  up  a  stricter,  not  a  looser 
law  for  the  conscience.  Every  particle  of  evil  in  the 
heart,  is  now  a  more  lamentable  and  gloomy  burden, 
than  it  ever  was  before.  The  cross  sets  a  darker  stamp 
upon  the  malignity  of  sin,  than  the  table  of  the  com- 
mandments ;  and  it  demands  of  us,  in  accents  louder 
than  Sinai's  thunder,  sympathetic  agonies  to  be  freed 
from  sin. 

The  cross,  I  repeat,  is  the  grand  ministration  to 
human  virtue.     It  is  a  language  to  all  lonely  and  neg- 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  83 

lected,  or  slighted  and  persecuted  virtue.  Often  do 
we  stand  in  situations  where  that  cross  is  our  dearest 
example  and  friend.  It  is,  perhaps,  beneath  the  hum- 
ble roof,  where  the  great  world  passes  us  by,  and  nei- 
ther sees  nor  knows  us;  where  no  one  blazons  our 
patience,  our  humility,  cheerfulness  and  disinterested- 
ness, to  the  multitude  that  is  ever  dazzled  with  out- 
ward splendour.  There  must  we  learn  of  him,  who  for 
us  was  a  neglected  wanderer,  and  had  not  even  where 
to  lay  his  head.  There  must  we  learn  of  him,  who 
was  meek  and  lowly  in  heart,  and  find  rest  unto  our 
souls.  There  must  we  learn  of  him,  who  bowed  that 
meek  and  lowly  head  upon  the  cross ;  dishonoured 
before  a  passing  multitude,  honoured  before  all  ages. 
Or  we  stand,  perhaps,  beneath  the  peiilous  eye  of  ob- 
servation, of  an  observation  not  friendly,  but  hostile 
and  scornful.  We  stand  up  for  our  integrity,  we 
stand  for  some  despised  and  persecuted  principle  in  re- 
ligion, or  morals,  or  science.  And  it  is  hard  to  bear 
opprobrium  and  injury  for  this ;  hard  for  the  noblest 
testimony  of  our  conscience,  to  bear  the  worst  inflic- 
tion of  human  displeasure.  The  dissenting  physician, 
the  dissenting  philanthropist,  the"  dissenting  Christian, 
knows  full  well  how  hard  it  is.  And  there,  keeping 
there  our  firm  stand,  must  we  look  upon  that  cross, 
whejeon  hung  one  who  was  despised  and  rejected  of 
men  ;  the  scorned  of  earth,  the  favoured  and  beloved 
of  heaven.  That  stand  for  conscience,  kept  firmly, 
humbly,  meekly,  we  must  learn,  is  not  mean  and  low  ; 
it  is  the  very  grandeur  of  life ;  it  is  the  magnificence 
of  the  world.  It  is  a  world  of  misconstruction,  of  in- 
jury, of  persecution  :  that  cross  is  lifted  up  to  stay  our 
fainting  courage,  to  fix  our  wavering  fidelity,  to  inspire 
us  with  meekness,  patience,  forgiveness  of  enemies, 
and  trust  in  God. 


84  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

Again,  the  cross  is  a  language  to  all  tempted  and 
struggling  virtue.  Jesus  was  tempted  in  all  points  as 
we  are,  yet  without  sin.  Thou  too  art  tempted.  Li 
high  estate  as  well  as  in  low,  thou  art  tempted.  Nay, 
and  the  misery  and  peril  of  the  case  is,  that  all  estates 
are  becoming  low  with  thee;  all  is  sinking  around 
thee,  when  temptation  presses  thee  sore.  When  thou 
art  tempted  to  SAverve  from  the  integrity  of  thy  spirit 
or  of  thy  life,  and  the  perilous  hour  draws  near,  and 
thou  reasonest  with  thyself,  thou  art  in  a  kind  of  de- 
spair. Thou  sayest  that  friends  desert  thee,  and  the 
world  looks  coldly  on  thee  ;  or  thou  sayest  that  thy 
passions  are  strong,  and  thy  soul  is  sad,  and  thy  state 
is  unhappy,  and  it  is  no  matter  what  befalls.  Then 
it  is,  that  to  thy  tempted  and  discouraged  virtue  Jesus 
speaks,  and  says,  "  Deny  the  evil  thought,  and  take  up 
thy  cross  and  follow  me.  Behold  my  agony,  behold 
my  desertion,  behold  the  drops  of  bloody  sweat ;  I 
shrink  in  the  f rally  of  nature,  as  thou  dost,  from  the 
cup  of  bitterness ;  I  pray  that  it  may  pass  from  me ;  but 
I  do  not  refuse  it.  There  is  worse  to  fear  than  pain, — 
guilt ;  failure  in  the  great  trial ;  the  prostration  of  all 
thy  nobleness  before  the  base  appliance  of  a  moment's 
gratification  ;  ay,  the  pain  of  all  thy  after  life,  for  an 
hour's  pleasure.  Learn  of  me,  that  virtue  does  not 
always  repose  on  a  bed  of  roses.  Oh  !  no ;  sharp 
pangs ;  sharp  nails ;  piercing  thorns,  are  for  me ; 
wonder  not  thou,  then,  at  the  fiery  trial  in  thy  soul ; 
my  sufferings  emblem  thine,  so  let  my  triumph :  all 
can  be  endured  for  victory,  hol}^  victory,  immortal 
victory." 

Once  more  ;  the  cross  appeals  to  all  heroic  and  lofty 
virtue.  Let  me  sa)?^  heroic ;  though  that  word  is 
scarcely  yet  found  in  the  Christian's  vocabulary.  But 
in  the  Christian's  life  there  is  to  be  a  heroism.     He  is 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  85 

to  feel  as  one  who  has  undertaken  a  lofty  enterprise. 
He  has  entered  upon  a  sublime  work.  It  is  his  being's 
task,  and  trial,  and  triumph.  We  think  too  poorly  of 
what  a  Christian  life  is.  We  hold  it  to  be  too  common- 
place. There  is  nothing  heroic  or  lofty,  as  to  the 
principle,  in  all  history,  in  all  the  majestic  fortunes  of 
humanity,  but  is  to  come  into  the  silent  strife  of  every 
Christian's  spirit. 

Now  to  this,  the  example  of  the  crucified  Saviour, 
is  an  emphatic  appeal.  The  cross  is  commonly  repre- 
sented as  humbling  to  the  human  heart ;  it  is  so  to 
the  worldly  pride  of  the  human  heart ;  but  it  is  also 
to  that  heart,  an  animating,  soul-thrilling,  ennobling 
call.  It  speaks  to  all  that  is  sacred,  disinterested,  self- 
sacrificing  in  humanity.  I  fear  that  we  regard  Christ's 
sacrifice  for  us  so  technically,  that  we  rob  it  of  its  vital 
import.  It  was  a  painful  sacrifice  for  us,  as  truly  as 
if  oiu*  brother  had  died  for  us ;  it  was  a  bitter  and 
bloody  propitiation,  to  bring  back  offending  man  to  his 
God  ;  it  was  a  groan  for  human  guilt  and  misery  that 
rent  the  earth  ;  it  w^as  a  death  endured  for  us,  that  we 
might  live,  and  live  forever.  I  speak  not  one  word  of 
this  technically ;  I  speak  vital  truth.  Even  if  Jesus 
had  died  as  any  other  martyr  dies  ;  if  he  had  thought 
of  nothing  but  his  own  fidelity,  had  thought  of  nothing, 
but  bearing  witness  to  the  truth ;  still  the  call  would, 
hy  inference,  have  come  to  us.  But  it  is  not  left  to  in- 
ference. Jesus  was  commissioned  to  bear  this  very  re- 
lation to  the  world.  He  knew  that  if  he  were  lifted 
up,  he  should  draw  all  men  to  him.  And  how  draw 
all  men  to  him  ?  Plainly,  in  sympathy,  in  imitation, 
in  love.  He  designed  to  speak  to  all  ages,  to  touch  all 
the  high  and  solemn  aspirations  of  unnumbered  mil- 
lions of  souls  ;  to  win  the  world  to  the  noble  spirit  of 
self-sacrifice  ;  to  disinterestedness,  and  fortitude,  and 
8 


86  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

patience  ;  to  meekness  and  candour,  and  gentleness  and 
forgiveness  of  injuries.  This  is  the  heroism  of  Chris- 
tianity. In  these  virtues,  centres  all  true  glory.  This 
did  Jesus  mean  to  illustrate.  His  purpose  was,  to  turn 
off  the  eyes  of  men  from  the  power,  pride,  ambition 
and  splendour  of  the  world,  to  the  true  grandeur,  dig- 
nity and  all-sufficing  good  of  love,  meekness  and  disin- 
terestedness. And  how  surely  have  his  purposes  and 
predictions  been  accomplished !  A  renovating  power 
has  gone  forth  from  him  upon  the  face  of  the  whole 
civilized  world,  and  is  fast  spreading  itself  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth.  And  one  emphatic  proof  of  this  is,  that 
the  cross,  before  the  stigma  of  the  vilest  crimes,  has 
become  the  emblem  of  all  spiritual  greatness. 

At  the  risk  of  wearying  your  patience,  my  brethren, 
let  me  invite  you  to  a  brief  consideration  of  one  other 
relation  of  the  cross  of  Christ ;  I  mean  its  relation  to 
human  happiness.  It  shall  be  a  closing  and  a  brief 
one. 

Jesus  was  a  sufferer  :  and  yet  so  filled  was  his  mind 
with  serenity  and  joy,  that  the  single  instance,  in 
which  Ave  read  that  he  wept,  seems  to  open  to  us  a 
new  light  upon  his  character.  Jesus  was  a  patient, 
cheerful,  triumphant  sufferer.  The  interest,  which  in 
this  light  his  character  possesses  for  the  whole  human 
race,  has  never,  it  appears  to  me,  been  sufficiently  il- 
lustrated. 

We  are  all  sufferers.  At  one  time  or  another,  in 
one  way  or  another,  we  all  meet  this  fate  of  humanity. 
So  true  is  this,  and  so  well  do  we  know  it  to  be  true, 
that  it  would  be  only  too  painful  to  open  the  wide  vo- 
lume of  proofs  which  life  is  continually  furnishing. 
It  is  really  necessary  to  lay  restraint  upon  our  thoughts, 
when  speaking  of  the  pains  and  afflictions  of  life.  I 
know  it  is  often  said,  that  the  pulpit  is  not  sufficiently 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  87 

exciting.  But  how  easy  were  it,  to  make  it  more  so  ! 
A  thoughtful  man  will  often  feel,  that  instead  of  cau- 
tiously and  considerately  touching  the  human  heart, 
he  might  go  into  that  heart,  with  swords  and  knives, 
to  cut,  to  wound,  and  almost  to  slay  it,  if  such  were 
his  pleasure.  What  if  he  were  to  describe  suffering 
infancy,  or  a  sick  and  dying  child,  or  the  agony  of 
parental  sorrow,  or  manhood  in  its  strength,  or  ma- 
tronage  in  its  beauty,  broken  down  under  some  inflic- 
tion, touching  the  mind  or  the  body,  to  more  than  in- 
fant weakness  ;  who  could  bear  it  ?  Yes  ;  it  is  the 
lot  of  humanity  to  suffer.  No  condition,  no  guarded 
palace,  no  golden  shield,  can  keep  out  the  shafts  of 
calamity.  And  especially  it  is  the  lot  of  intellectual 
life  to  suffer.  As  man  becomes  properly  man  ;  as  his 
mind  grapples  with  its  ordained  probation  ;  the  dis- 
pensation naturally  presses  harder  upon  him.  The 
face  of  careless  childhood  may  be  arrayed  with  per- 
petual smiles  ;  but  behold,  how  the  brow  of  manhood, 
and  the  matronly  broAV,  grows  serious  and  thoughtful, 
as  years  steal  on  ;  how  the  cheek  grows  pale,  and 
what  a  meaning  is  set  in  the  depths  of  many  an  eye 
around  you  ;  all  proclaiming  histories,  long  histories 
of  care  and  anxiety,  and  disappointment  and  afflic- 
tion ! 

Now  into  this  overshadoAved  world.  One  has  come, 
to  commune  w^ith  suffering ;  to  soothe,  to  relieve,  to 
conquer  it :  himself  a  sufferer,  himself  acquainted  with 
grief,  himself  the  conqueror  of  pain  ;  himself  made 
perfect  through  sufferings ;  and  teaching  us  to  gain 
like  virtue  and  victory.  For  in  all  this,  I  see  him  ever 
calm,  patient,  cheerful,  triumphant. 

And  what  a  touching  aspect  does  all  this  strong  and 
calm  endurance  lend  to  his  afflictions.  For  he  was 
afflicted,  and  his  soul  was  sometimes  "  sorrowful,  even 


88  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

unto  death."  When  I  read,  that  at  the  grave  of  Laza- 
rus, "  Jesus  wept ;"  when  I  hear  him  say,  m  the  gar- 
den of  Gethsemane,  "  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  remove 
this  cup  from  me ;"  when  from  the  cross  arose  that 
piercing  cry,  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  for- 
saken me  ?"  I  know  that  he  suffered.  I  know  that 
loneUness,  and  desertion,  and  darkness  were  upon  his 
path ;  I  feel  that  sorrow  and  fear  sometimes  touched, 
with  a  passing  shade,  that  seraphic  countenance. 

But  oh  !  how  divinely  does  he  rise  above  all !  What 
a  peculiarity  Avas  there  in  the  character  of  this  wonder- 
ful Being ;  the  rejected,  the  scorned,  the  scourged,  the 
crucified  :  and  yet  no  being  was  ever  so  considerate 
towards  the  faults  of  his  friends,  as  he  was  towards 
the  hostility  of  his  very  enemies ;  no  being  was  ever 
so  kindly  and  compassionate  in  spirit ;  so  habitually 
even  and  cheerful  in  temper  ;  so  generous  and  gracious 
in  manner.  I  cannot  express  the  sense  I  have  of  his 
equanimity,  of  his  gentleness,  of  the  untouched  beauty 
and  sweetness  of  his  philanthropy,  of  the  unapproach- 
ed  greatness  of  his  magnanimity  and  fortitude.  He 
looked  through  this  life,  with  a  spiritual  eye,  and  saw 
the  wise  and  beneficent  effect  of  suffering.  He 
looked  up  with  confiding  faith  to  a  Father  in  heaven  ; 
he  looked  through  the  long  and  blessed  ages  beyond 
this  life ;  and  earth,  with  all  its  scenes  and  sorrows, 
shrunk  to  a  point,  amidst  the  all-surrounding  infinity 
of  truth  and  goodness,  and  heaven. 

Thus,  my  brethren,  has  he  taught  us  how  to  suffer. 
He  has  resolved  that  dark  problem  of  life ;  how  that 
suffering,  in  the  long  account,  may  be  better  than  ease ; 
and  poverty,  better  than  riches  ;  and  desertion,  better 
than  patronage  ;  and  mortification,  better  than  ap- 
plause ;  and  disappointment,  better  than  success  ;  and 
martyrdom,  better  than  all  honours  of  a  sinful  life ; 


ON    THE    ATONEMENT.  89 

and  how,  therefore,  that  suffering  is  to  be  met  with  a 
brave  and  manly  heart,  with  a  sustaining  faith,  with 
a  cheerful  courage  ;  counting  it  all  joy,  and  making  it 
all  triumph. 

Thus  have  I  attempted  ;  and  I  feel  that  I  ought  not 
to  detain  you  longer ;  I  have  attempted,  however  im- 
perfectly, to  unfold  the  intent  for  which  Jesus  suffered  ; 
to  unfold  the  import  and  teaching  of  the  cross  of 
Christ  to  human  guilt,  to  human  virtue,  and  to  human 
happiness.  May  you  know  more  of  the  truth  as  it  is 
in  Jesus,  than  words  can  utter,  or  worldly  heart  con 
ceive  !  And  may  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
be  with  you  always.     Amen. 

8* 


III. 

ON    THE    FIVE    POINTS    OF    CALVINISM. 

The  celebrated  five  j^oints  of  Calvinism  are  the 
following ;  total  depravity,  election,  particular  redemp- 
tion, irresistible  grace,  and  the  final  perseverance  of 
saints.  It  has  been  justly  observed,  that  "the  two  first 
only  are  fundamental  doctrines ;  the  three  last  neces- 
sary consequences."  The  consequences,  however,  are 
none  the  less  liable  to  their  separate  and  particular 
objections.  But  as  I  propose  to  confine  myself  to  ques- 
tions at  issue  between  Orthodox  and  Liberal  Christians, 
I  shall  not  think  it  necessary  to  offer  anything  more 
than  a  passing  remark  or  two,  on  the  doctrines  of  par- 
ticular redemption,  and  the  saints'  perseverance. 

Particular  redemption,  or  the  limitation  of  the  atone- 
ment, both  in  its  design  and  efficacy,  to  the  elect,  is  a 
doctrine  which  has  long  since  been  discarded  by  the 
Congregation alists  of  this  country.  Indeed,  these 
churches  are  about  as  improperly  called  Calvijiistic, 
as  they  are,  in  common  parlance  among  the  mass  of 
our  people,  denominated  Presbyterian.  It  is  worth 
while  to  remark,  though  it  be  only  for  the  sake  of 
correcting  a  verbal  inaccuracy,  that  there  are  not 
above  a  dozen  or  twenty  Presbyterian  churches  in  all 
New  England  ;  the  word  Presbyterian  properly  stand- 
ing for  a  form  of  church  government,  not  for  a  faith. 
And  it  is  more  important  to  observe,  for  the  sake  of 
correcting  an  error  in  the  minds  of  the  people,  that 
there  is  probably,  in  strictness  of  speech,  not  one  Calvin- 


ON  THE  FIVE  POINTS  OF  CALVINISM.     91 

istic  Church  in  the  ancient  dominion  of  the  Puritans. 
Every  one  of  the  jive  jjoints  has  been  essentially 
modified,  has  been  changed  from  what  it  originally 
was. 

But  to  return ;  the  doctrine  of  particular  redemption 
deserves  to  be  noticed,  as  an  instance  of  that  attempt 
at  mathematical  precision^  which,  as  I  think,  is  a  dis- 
tinguishing trait  of  Calvinism,  and  which  has  done  so 
much  harm  to  the  theological  speculations  of  this 
country.  I  shall  have  occasion  to  refer  to  this  kind  of 
reasoning  again.  In  the  instance  before  us,  it  appears 
in  the  following  statement.  Sinners,  it  was  said,  had 
incurred  a  debt  to  divine  justice  ;  tliey  owed  a  certain 
amount  of  suffering.  Jesus  Christ  undertook,  in  behalf 
of  the  elect,  to  pay  this  debt.  Now,  if  he  had  suffered 
more,  paid  more,  than  was  necessar)^  to  satisfy  this 
particular  demand,  there  would  have  been  a  waste  of 
suffering,  a  waste  of  this  transferable  merit.  But  there 
was  no  such  waste ;  the  suffering  exactly  met  the  de- 
mand ;  and  therefore  the  redemption  was  particular  ; 
it  was  limited  to  the  elect ;  no  others  could  be  saved, 
without  another  atonement.  This  was,  once,  theologi- 
cal reasoning !  And  to  dispute  it,  was  held  to  be 
intolerable  presumption.  Such  presumption  severed, 
for  a  time,  the  New  England  churches  from  their 
southern  brethren.  Such  a  dispute,  with  one  or  two 
others  like  it,  has  rended  the  Presbyterian  Church 
asunder. 

Let  us  now  say  a  word  on  the  doctrine  of  tJie  saints' 
perseverance.  If  you  separate  from  this  the  idea  of  an 
irresistible  grace,  impelling,  and,  as  it  were,  compelling 
Christians  to  persevere  in  piety  and  virtue,  there  is 
little,  perhaps,  to  object  to  it.  It  is  so  separated  in  the 
presejit  Orthodox  belief,  and  therefore,  it  is  scarcely  a 
question  in  controversy.     We  all  believe,  that  a  man, 


92  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

who  has  become  once  thoroughly  and  heartily  inter- 
ested in  the  true  Gospel,  doctrine,  character  and  glory 
of  Jesus  Christ,  is  very  likely  to  persevere  and  grow  in 
that  interest.  I  confess,  that  my  own  conviction  on 
this  point  is  very  strong,  and  scarcely  falls  short  of  any 
language  in  which  the  doctrine  of  perseverance  is  de- 
clared. I  can  hardly  conceive,  how  a  man,  who  has 
once  fully  opened  his  eyes  upon  that  "  Light,"  should 
ever  be  willing  to  close  them.  And  I  believe,  that  in 
proportion  as  the  Gospel  is  understood  and  felt,  felt  in 
all  its  deep  fountains  of  peace  and  consolation,  under- 
stood in  all  its  revelations  and  unfoldings  of  purity  and 
moral  beauty ;  that  in  proportion  to  this,  the  instances 
of  "falling  away,"  whether  into  infidelity  or  worldliness, 
will  be  more  and  more  rare.  I  am  aware,  however, 
and  think  it  ought  to  be  said,  that  the  common  state- 
ments of  the  doctrine  of  perseverance  are  dangerous  to 
the  unreflecting  and  to  the  speculative.  The  truth  is, 
that  we  ought  to  have  nothing  to  do  w^ith  perseverance 
as  a  doctrine,  and  everything  w^ith  it,  as  a  fact.  Good 
men  shall  persevere ;  good  Christians,  above  all,  shall 
persevere ;  but  let  them  remember  that  they  can  do  so, 
only  by  constant  Avatchfulness,  endeavour,  self-denial, 
prayer,  fidelity. 

I  shall  now  take  up  the  more  important  subjects 
named  at  the  head  of  this  article. 

The  first  is  total  depravity,  including,  of  course,  the 
position  that  this  depravity  is  native. 

I  shall  say  nothing,  in  the  few  brief  hints  I  have 
now  to  offer,  of  the  practical  views,  which  we  all  ought 
deeply  to  consider,  of  the  actual  depravity  of  man.  I 
am  concerned,  at  present,  then,  only  with  the  specula- 
tive and  abstract  doctrine  of  native,  total  depravity. 
And  I  am  anxious,  in  the  first  place,  to  state  it,  in  such 
a  manner,  as  shall  be  unexceptionable  to  its  most 


ON    THE    FIVE    POINTS    OF    CALVINISM.  93 

scrupulous  advocate.      It  is  not,  then,  according  to 
modern  explanations,  that  man  is  unable  to  be  good ; 
or  that  he  is  as  bad  as  he  can  be ;  or  that  his  natural 
appetites,  sympathies  and  instincts  are  originally  bad. 
I  have  known  the  distinction  to  be  put  in  this  Ava)^ ; 
that  man  is  totally  depraved,  in  the  theological  sense 
of  those  words,  but  not  in  the  common  and  classical 
sense  of  them,  as  they  are  used  in  our  English  litera- 
ture, and  in  ordinary  conversation  :  a  very  good  dis- 
tinction, but  a  very  bad  precedent  and  principle  for  all 
fair  reasoning.     For  if  men  are  allowed  to  apply  to 
common  words  this  secret,  technical,  theological  mean- 
ing, their  speculations  can  neither  be  understood,  nor 
met,  nor  subjected  to  the  laws  of  common  sense.    It  is 
not  safe  in  moral  reasonings,  to  admit  two  kinds  of 
depravity,  or  two  kinds  of  goodness.     Men  Avill  be  too 
ready  to  find  out,  that  it  is  easier  to  be  good,  according 
to  one  theory  of  goodness,  than  according  to  another. 
And,  it  has  too  often  come  to  pass,  that  regenerated 
and  sanctified — the  theological  words — have  not  meant, 
pure,  humble,  amiable,  and  virtuous.     And  so,  on  the 
other  hand,  a  man  may  much  more  easily  and  calmly 
admit  that  he  is  depraved,  in  the  theological,  than  in 
the  common  sense.     And  in  makino-  this  distinction, 
_he  deprives  himself  of  one  of  the  most  powerful  means 
of  conviction.     There  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  that 
theory  of  moral  sentiments,  though  it  does  not  go  to 
the  bottom  of  the  subject,  which  maintains  that  a  man 
learns  to  condemn  and  reproach  himself,  through  syin- 
pathy  with  that  feeling  of  otJiers,  Avhich  condemns  and 
reproaches  him.    But  of  this,  by  his  peculiar  and  secret 
idea  of  depravity,  the  reasoner  in  question  deprives 
himself.     And  hence  it  is,  that  such  a  man  can  talk 
loudly  and  extravagantly  of  his  own  depravity.     It  is 
because  he  does  not  use  that  word  in  the  ordinary  sense, 


94  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

nor  feel  the  reproach  that  attaches  to  it.  It  is  hence 
that  congregations  can  cahnly  and  indifferently  listen 
to  those  charges  of  utter  depravity,  which,  if  received 
in  their  common  acceptation,  would  set  them  on  fire 
with  resentment. 

But  the  distinction  does  not  much  tend,  after  all,  to 
help  the  matter,  as  a  doctrine,  though  it  does  tend  so 
nearly  to  neutralize  it  as  a  conviction ;  because,  it  is 
still  contended,  that  the  theological  sense  is  the  true 
sense.  When  the  advocate  of  this  doctrine  says,  that 
men  are  utterly  depraved,  he  means  that  they  are  so,  in 
the  only  true,  in  the  highest  sense  of  those  words.  And 
when  he  says,  that  this  depravity  is  native,  he  means 
to  fix  the  charge,  not  indeed,  upon  the  whole  nature  of 
man,  not  upon  his  original  appetites  and  sympathies, 
but  upon  his  highest,  his  moral  nature.  He  means  to 
say,  that  his  moral  nature — and  nothing  else,  strictly 
speaking,  can  be  sinful  or  holy — that  his  moral  nature 
produces  nothing  but  sin ;  that  all  w^hich  can  sin  in 
man  does  sin,  and  does  nothing  hut  sin,  so  long  as  it 
follows  that  tendency  which  comes  from  his  nature. 
He  means  to  say,  that  sin  is  as  truly  and  certainly  the 
fruit  of  his  moral  nature,  as  thought  is  the  fruit  of  his 
7nental  nature.  And  it  makes  no  difference  to  say 
that  he  sins  freely,  for  it  is  just  as  true  that  he  thinks 
freely.  In  fact,  he  is  not  free  to  cease  from  doing 
either.  In  this  view,  indeed,  depravity  comes  nothing 
short  of  an  absolute  inability  to  be  holy.  For  if  the 
moral  constitution  of  man  is  such,  as  naturally  to  pro- 
duce nothing  but  sin,  I  see  not  how  he  can  any  more 
help  sinning,  than  he  can  help  thinking.  I  do  not  for- 
get that  it  is  said,  that  man  Jias  the  moral  power  to  be 
holy ;  for  I  am  glad  to  admit  any  modification  in  the 
statement  of  the  doctrine.  But,  in  fact,  what  does  it 
amount  to  ?  What  is  a  moral  power  to  be  good,  but  a 
disposition  to  be  -o  ?     And  if  no  such  disposition  is 


ON    THE    FIVE    POINTS    OP    CALVINISM.  95 

allowed  to  belong  to  human  nature,  I  see  not  in  what 
intelligible  sense  any  jpoiver  can  belong  to  it.^ 

I  will  not  pursue  this  definition  of  human  depravity 
farther  into  those  metaphysical  distinctions  and  subtil- 
ties,  to  which  it  would  lead.  Bat  I  would  now  ask 
the  reader,  as  a  matter  of  argument,  whether  he  can 
believe,  that  the  simple  and  practical  teachers  of  our 
religion  ever  thought  of  settling  any  of  these  nice  and 
abstruse  questions  ?  For  it  is  not  enough  for  Orthodox 
believers  on  this  point,  that  we  admit  the  Scripture 
writers  to  have  represented  human  depravity  as  ex- 
ceedingly great  and  lamentable  ;  that  they  undoubt- 
edly did  ;  but  the  Orthodox  interpreter  insists,  that 
they  meant  to  represent  it,  with  metaphysical  exact- 
ness, as  native  and  total.  He  insists,  that  they  meant 
just  so  much.  That  they  meant  a  great  deal,  I  repeat, 
is  unquestionable  ;  that  they  used  phraseology  of  a 
strong  and  unlimited  character,  is  admitted  ;  but  to 
draw  from  writings,  so  marked  with  solemn  earnest- 
ness and  feeling,  certain  precise  and  metaphysical 
truths;  to  extract  dogmas  from  the  bold  and  heart- 
burning denunciations  of  prophets  ;  to  lay  hold  of 
weapons  of  controversy  in  the  sorrowful  and  indignant 
reproaches  of  those,  who  w^ept  over  human  wickedness, 
seems  to  me  preposterous.  Surely,  if  any  one  of  us 
were  speaking  of  some  very  iniquitous  practice,  of  some 
abominable  traffic,  or  of  some  city  or  country  whose 
wickedness  cried  to  heaven,  we  should  speak  strongly, 
we  should  exhaust  our  language  of  its  strongest  epi- 

*  I  believe  that  this  is  still  the  prevailing  view  of  human  depravity : 
but  I  should  not  omit,  perhaps,  to  notice  that,  since  these  essays 
were  written,  another  modification  of  the  doctrine  has  been  pro- 
posed. It  is,  that  sin  is  not  the  necessary  result  of  man's  moral 
constitution,  but  the  invariable  result  of  his  moral  condition. 
There  is  little  to  choose.  In  either  case,  sin,  and  sin  only,  is  in- 
evitably bound  up  with  human  existence. 


96  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

thets  ;  it  would  be  perfectly  natural  to  do  so  :  but, 
as  surely,  the  last  thing,  we  should  think  of,  would 
be  that  of  laying  down  a  doctrine :  the  last  thing  we 
should  think  of,  would  be  that  of  philosophizing,  and 
propounding  theoretic  dogmas  upon  the  nature  of  the 
soul !  And,  to  make  the  case  parallel,  I  may  add,  that 
we  should  by  no  means  think  of  charging  every  or  any 
individual,  in  such  a  country,  or  city,  or  company, 
with  total  and  native  depravity.  I  know,  there  will 
be  some  to  say,  but  they  will  not  be  the  really  intelli- 
gent and  thinking,  that  oz/r  language  and  Scj^iptiire 
language  are  different  things.  Let  them  be  different 
in  as  many  respects  as  any  one  pleases  ;  but  they  must 
not  be  different  in  this.  All  language  is  to  be  inter- 
preted  by  the  same  general  jjrinciples.  He,  who 
does  not  admit  this,  has  not  taken  the  first  step  in 
true  theology,  and  is  not  to  be  disputed  with  on  this 
ground  ;  but  must  be  carried  back  to  consider  "what 
be  the  first  principles"  applicable  to  such  inquiries. 

As  a  matter  of  argument,  otit  of  the  Scriptures,  I 
will  ask  but  one  further  question,  and  then  leave  the 
subject.  I  ask  the  Calvinist  to  say,  from  what  source 
he  originally  derived  his  ideas  of  moral  qualities  ; 
whence  he  obtained  his  conceptiojis  of  goodness,  holi- 
ness, &c.  ?  I  am  certain,  that  neither  he  nor  any  man 
has  obtained  these  conceptions  of  moral  qualities  from 
anything  but  the  experience  of  them.  A  man  could 
no  more  conceive  of  goodness,  without  having  felt  it, 
at  some  moment,  and  to  some  extent,  than  he  could 
conceive  of  sweetness  without  tasting  it.  No  descrip- 
tion, no  reasoning,  no  comparison  could  inform  him 
either  of  the  one  or  the  other.  A  man  does  not  ap- 
prove of  what  is  right,  by  any  reasoning  ;  whether 
upon  utility,  or  the  fitness  of  things,  or  upon  anything 
else ;  but  by  simple  consciousness.     This  is  the  doc- 


ON  THE  FIVE  POINTS  OF  CALVINISM.     97 

trine  of  our  most  approved  moral  philosophers.  But, 
consciousness  of  what  ?  Of  the  qualities  approved, 
plainly.  A  man  must  Jiave  a  right  affection  before  he 
can  approve  it,  before  he  can  know  anything  about  it. 
Does  not  this  settle  the  question  ?  A  totally  and  na- 
tively depraved  being  could  have  no  idea  of  rectitude, 
or  holiness,  and  by  consequence,  no  idea  of  the  moral 
character  of  God.  And  it  has,  therefore,  been  rightly 
argued,  by  some  who  have  held  the  doctrine  we  are 
discussing,  that  men  naturally  have  no  such  ideas. 
But  I  will  not  suppose  that  this  is  a  position  to  be  con- 
tended against ;  since  it  would  follow,  that  men  are 
commanded,  on  peril  and  pain  of  all  future  woes,  to 
love  a  holiness  and  a  moral  perfection  of  God,  which 
they  are  not  merely  unable  to  love,  but  of  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  supposition,  they  have  no  conception  ! 

The  two  remaining  points  to  be  considered  are  elec- 
tion and  irresistible  grace,  or  the  divine  influence  on 
the  mind.  I  take  these  together,  because  I  have  one 
principle  of  scriptural  interpretation  to  advance,  which 
is  applicable  to  them  both.  And  as  I  do  not  remember 
to  have  seen  it  brought  forward,  in  discussions  of  tliis 
nature,  and  as  it  seems  to  me,  an  unquestionably  just 
principle,  I  shall  take  up  some  space  to  explain  it. 
-  It  must  be  admitted,  that  very  strong  and  pointed 
language  is  used  in  the  New  Testament,  concerning 
election,  and  God's  spirit  or  influence  in  the  human 
heart.  x\nd  I  think  it  is  apparent  that  the  Arminian 
opposers  of  these  doctrines  have  betra3^ed  a  conscious- 
ness, that  they  had  considerable  difficulties  to  contend 
with.  They  have  seemed  to  be  aware  that  the  lan- 
guage of  Scripture,  which  their  Calvinistic  adversaries 
quote,  is  strong,  and  they  have  shown  some  disposition 
to  lessen  its  force,  or  to  turn  it  into  vague  and  general 
applications.  Now^,  for  my  own  part,  I  find  no  dif- 
9 


98  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

ficulty  in  admitting  the  whole  force  and  personal  bear- 
ing of  these  representations,  though  I  cannot  receive 
them  in  the  form  which  Calvinism  has  given  them. 
And  I  make  this  exception,  too,  not  because  I  am  opposed 
to  the  strength  and  directness  of  the  Calvinistic  belief, 
but  because  I  am  opposed,  in  this,  as  in  other  respects, 
to  the  metaphysical  and  moral  principles  of  the  system. 
In  short,  I  believe  in  personal  election,  and  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Almighty  Spirit  on  the  mind :  and  this, 
or  what  amounts  to  this,  I  suspect  all  Christians  be- 
lieve. For,  an  "  electlcn  of  communities,"  as  some 
interpret  it,  is  still  an  election  of  the  individuals  that 
compose  them.  And  an  "  election  to  privileges,"  as 
others  prefer  to  consider  it,  is  still  making  a  distinction, 
and  a  distinction  on  which  salvation  depends.  If  it 
be  said  that  an  "election  to  privileges"  saves  the  doc- 
trine of  human  freedom  ;  so,  I  answer,  must  any  elec- 
tion save  the  doctrine  of  human  freedom,  but  that  of 
the  fatalist.  And  the  same  may  be  said  of  divine  in- 
fluence. 

Let  us,  then,  go  to  the  proposed  principle  of  interpre- 
tation, which,  I  confess,  relieves  my  own  mind,  and  I 
hope  it  may  other  minds. 

I  say,  then,  that  tlte  apostles  wrote  for  their  subject. 
It  is  a  well  established  principle  among  the  learned, 
though  too  little  applied,  that  the  apostles  wrote  for 
their  age ;  with  particular  reference,  that  is,  to  the 
circumstances  of  their  own  times.  I  now  maintain, 
in  addition  to  this,  that  they  lorote  for  their  subject. 
Their  subject,  their  exclusive  subject,  was  religion ; 
and  the  principles  of  the  divine  government,  which  they 
apply  to  this  subject  may  be  equally  applicable  to 
everything  else.  Their  not  saying^  that  these  prin- 
ciples have  such  an  application,  does  not  prove  that 
they  have  not ;  because  they  wrote  for  their  subject, 


ON    THE    FIVE    POINTS    OF    CALVINISM.  99 

and  it  was  not  their  business  to  say  so.  In  other 
words,  God's  government  is  infinite ;  and  they  speak 
but  of  one  department  of  it.  His  foreknowledge  and 
his  influence  are  unbounded  ;  they  speak  of  this  fore- 
knowledge and  influence,  but  in  one  single  respect. 
But  instead  of  limiting  the  application  of  their  prin- 
ciples to  this  one  department  and  this  one  respect,  the 
inference  would  rather  be,  that  they  are  to  be  extended 
to  everything.  And  in  fact  this  extension  of  the  prin- 
ciple with  regard  to  election — in  one  instance,  and  I 
believe,  only  one — is  hinted  at,  where  the  apostle  says, 
that  Christians  are  "predestinated  according  to  the 
purpose  of  him,  who  ivorketh  all  things^  after  the 
counsel  of  his  own  will."  If  this  be  true,  then,  every- 
thing is  a  matter  of  divine  counsel ;  everything  is 
disposed  of  by  election.  And  men  are  as  much  elected 
to  be  philosophers,  merchants,  or  inhabitants  of  this 
country  or  that  country,  as  they  are  elected  to  be  Chris- 
tians. If  this  is  election,  I  believe  there  w411  be  found 
no  difficulty  in  it;  save  what  exists  in  that  inscruta- 
bleness  of  the  subject,  w^hich  must  forbid  our  expect- 
ing ever  to  fathom  it. 

It  will  be  apparent  from  this  view,  in  what  I  diflfer 
from  Calvinists.  They  make  that  foreknowledge  and 
purpose  of  God,  which  relate  to  the  religious  characters 
of  men^  a  peculiarity  in  the  divine  government.  Con- 
necting the  doctrine  of  election,  as  they  do,  with  that 
of  special  grace,  they  leave  an  impression  unfavourable 
to  human  exertion,  and  to  the  divine  impartiality. 
But  I  maintain,  without  denying  the  general  difficul- 
ties of  the  subject,  that  the  religious  part  of  the  char- 
acter is  no  more  the  result  of  the  divine  prescience  and 
purpose,  than  any  other  part ;  and  we  have  no  more 
reason  to  perplex  ourselves  with  this  department  of 
the  divine  government,  than  with  any  other. 


100  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

Our  principle  admits  of  a  fuller  illustration  on  the 
subject  of  divine  influence.  I  say  that  the  apostles 
wrote  for  their  subject,  and  wrote  so  exclusively  for  it, 
that  no  inference  is  to  be  raised,  from  their  silence^ 
against  applying  their  principles  to  other  subjects.  And 
I  will  present  an  illustration  of  this  argument,  to  which 
no  one  who  respects  the  authority  of  Scripture,  can 
object.  Look,  then,  at  the  inspired  writers  of  old. 
Writing  as  they  did,  under  a  long  established  form  and 
dispensation  of  religion,  they  took  a  freer  and  wider 
range  of  subjects.  And  thus  they  extended  the  doc- 
trine of  divine  influence  to  everything.  They  applied 
it  much  more  frequently  to  outward  things,  than  to 
the  mind  ;  and  much  more  frequently  to  the  common 
business  of  life,  than  to  religion.  Nay,  they  asserted 
the  necessity  of  this  influence,  in  the  common  affairs 
of  life,  as  strongly  as  the  New  Testament  writers  do, 
in  the  spiritual  concerns  of  religion.  They  as  much, 
and  as  strongly  asserted,  that  men  could  not  succeed^ 
in  business,  or  in  study,  in  agriculture,  in  the  mechanic 
arts,  or  in  seeking  after  knowledge,  without  God's  aid 
and  influence,  as  our  Christian  teachers  assert,  that 
men  cannot  grow  in  grace  and  piety,  without  that  aid 
and  influence.  But,  now,  observe  how  different  was 
the  situation  of  the  New  Testament  writers.  They 
had  no  leisure,  if  I  may  speak  so,  to  turn  aside  to  the 
common  affairs  of  life.  They  were  obliged  to  put 
forth  every  energy  for  the  propagation  and  defence  of 
a  new  faith.  They  had  no  time,  for  instance,  to  pre- 
pare general  and  abstract  pieces  of  devotion,  as  many 
of  the  Psalms  are;  or  books  of  maxims  and  apo- 
thegms, like  the  Proverbs ;  or  highly  wrought  moral 
dialogues,  like  the  Book  of  Job.  They  had  no  time  to 
descant  on  matters  of  speculative  morality,  the  pru- 
dence of  life,  and  the  diversified  ways  of  Providence. 


ON    THE    FIVE    POINTS    OF    CALVINISM.         101 

Religion — religion,  as  a  matter  of  evidence  and  experi- 
ence, was  the  great  engrossing  theme.  And  hence 
they  have  spoken  of  that  divine  influence  and  superin- 
tendence, which  really  extend  to  all  things ;  they  have 
spoken  of  them,  I  say,  especially  and  chiefly  in  rela- 
tion to  religion.  But  it  would  be  as  unjustifiable  and 
unsafe,  from  this  circumstance,  to  limit  the  doctrine 
of  divine  influence  to  religious  matters,  as  it  would  be, 
from  consulting  the  ancient  records,  to  limit  it  to  out- 
ward nature,  and  the  common  affairs  of  life.  The 
only  safe  rule,  whether  in  reasoning,  or  for  devotion, 
is  to  extend  it  to  all  things. 

In  all  this,  I  am  aware  that  I  am  asserting  nothing 
that  is  new.  I  am  only  attempting  to  free  the  subject 
from  those  difficulties,  that  have  arisen  from  the  pecu- 
liarity of  the  New  Testament  communications.  I 
repeat  it,  that,  in  the  principles,  there  is  nothing  new 
or  peculiar.  All  good  Christians  have  believed,  and 
must  believe,  that  the  wise  counsel  and  holy  providence 
of  God  extend  to  everything.  We  must  all  believe,  in 
some  sense,  in  election  and  divine  influence.  The 
principal  difficulty  and  danger  to  most  minds,  I  suspect, 
have  arisen  from  their  attaching  too  much  peculiarity 
to  the  counsel  and  influence  of  the  Almighty,  in  the 
matters  of  rehgion.  They  have  said,  "  If  I  am  elected, 
I  shall  certainly  be  saved  ;  and  if  I  am  not,  it  is  in  vain 
for  me  to  try.  And  if  God's  Spirit  works  within  me 
the  work  of  faith,  I  have  nothing  to  do  myself."  Now, 
let  them  extend  their  views  of  this  subject ;  and  they 
will  be  safe,  and  ought  to  be  satisfied.  But,  at  any  rate, 
they  will  be  safe.  They  will  be  effectually  guarded 
from  the  abuse  of  these  doctrines.  For  as  no  one  will 
expect  to  be  a  physician,  or  a  philosopher,  without 
study,  because  he  hopes  or  imagines,  that  he  is  fore- 
ordained, or  will  be  supernaturally  assisted,  to  gain 
9# 


102  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

eminence  in  these  professions  ;  so  neither  will  any 
similar  hope  of  being  a  Christian,  and  being  saved, 
lessen  the  exertions  that  are  suitable  to  that  end. 
With  these  views  of  the  doctrines,  in  question,  common 
sense  may  be  trusted  to  guard  them  from  perversion. 

I  said  that  the  danger  was  of  attaching  too  much 
peculiarity  to  that  counsel  and  influence  of  God,  which 
are  connected  with  our  salvation.  Nevertheless,  some- 
thing of  this  nature,  I  apprehend,  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
them.  I  distrust  single  views  of  subjects.  It  arises,  I 
believe,  from  the  imperfection  and  weakness  of  our 
minds,  that  our  whole  mental  vision  is  apt  to  be  en- 
grossed with  seeing  a  truth  in  one  point  of  light. 
Separate  views  must  be  combined,  to  form  a  just  and 
well-proportioned  faith.  This,  above  all  things,  is 
liable  to  be  forgotten  amidst  the  biasses  of  controversy. 
We  may  take  the  larger  view  of  the  subjects  before  us, 
and  yet  we  may  admit  that  God  does  especially  inter- 
pose in  behalf  of  religious  beings,  weak  and  tempted 
as  we  are.  And  we  may  admit,  that  it  has  especially 
pleased  him,  that  it  is  a  counsel  most  agreeable  to  his 
nature,  to  bring  good  out  of  evil,  to  bring  good  men 
out  of  this  world  of  temptations.  I  believe  both.  It 
does  not  perplex  nor  disturb  me,  but  it  calms  and  it 
comforts  me,  to  believe  that  the  good  and  merciful 
Spirit  of  God  is  ail  around  me,  and  can  interpose  for 
me  and  assist  me,  in  my  times  of  trouble,  and  tempta- 
tion, and  peril.  And  it  does  not  pain  me,  but  it  imparts 
satisfaction  to  my  mind  to  believe,  that  the  counsel, 
which  has  designed  the  highest  good  to  its  obedient 
offspring,  is  an  eternal  counsel ! 

If,  now,  on  the  whole,  it  be  said  that  these  views, 
which  have  been  offered,  lessen  the  importance,  or  the 
reality  of  God's  counsel  and  providence,  we  maintain 
on  the  contrary,  that  they  assert  them  in  the  highest 


ON    THE    FIVE    POINTS    OF    CALVINISM.  103 

degree  ;  that  they  carry  them  into  all  things,  and  thus 
directly  lead  to  devotion :  that  they  serve,  therefore,  the 
grandest  purpose  of  religious  instruction,  by  bringing 
God,  in  his  power  and  his  mercy,  near  to  us ;  by  im- 
pressing a  sense  of  our  dependance  on  him,  and  our 
unspeakable  obligations  to  him,  at  every  moment,  and 
every  step,  for  every  attainment  and  blessing  of  life. 
This  is  the  religious  frame  of  spirit  that  we  most  need 
to  gain ;  to  feel,  that  God  is  near  to  us,  that  he  upholds 
and  blesses  us  ;  that  he  is  near  to  us  always  ;  that  all 
things  are  filled  with  his  presence ;  that  the  universe 
around  us  is  not  so  much  a  standing  monument,  as  a 
living  expression  of  his  goodness ;  that  all  which  we 
enjoy  is  not  so  much  benevolence,  sending  down  its 
gifts  from  afar  to  us,  as  it  is  the  energy  of  his  love 
working  within  us. 

This,  then,  is  the  practical  result  of  our  reflections ; 
that  God  is  all  in  all ;  that  his  ever-living  mercy  and 
his  ever-working  power  pervade  all  things  ;  that  they 
are  in  all  height  and  in  all  depth,  in  what  is  vast  and 
what  is  minute,  in  the  floating  atom  and  the  rolling 
w^orld,  in  the  fall  of  a  sparrow  to  the  ground  and  in 
the  great  system  of  the  universe,  in  the  insect's  life, 
and  in  the  soaring  spirit  of  the  archangel. 
"  It  is  in  Him,  that  each  of  us  lives,  and  moves,  and 
has  his  being.  If  we  have  gained  any  blessings  of  life, 
and  if  we  have  made  any  acquisition  of  knowledge,  it 
is  from  him.  And  especially,  if  we  have  made  any 
attainments  in  piety ;  if  we  are  learning  the  great 
lesson  of  life,  and  that  which  prepares  us  for  another 
and  a  better ;  if  we  are  learning  to  be  devout  and  pure 
in  heart,  to  be  affectionate,  and  forbearing,  and  patient, 
and  penitent,  and  forgiving  ;  if  the  dew  of  a  heavenly 
influence  is  descending  upon  us,  and  the  fruits  of  virtue 
and  goodness  are  springing  up  within  us ;  if  the  uni- 


104  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

verse  is  ministering  to  our  devotion,  if  religion,  with 
every  kind  and  gracious  power,  has  visited  us,  and  has 
become  our  friend,  and  guide,  and  comforter,  the  em- 
ployment, and  happiness,  and  end  of  our  being ;  Oh  ! 
this  is  an  emanation  from  the  Divinity,  a  beam  of 
heaven's  own  light,  an  expression  of  God's  mercy,  that 
demands  our  highest  and  tenderest  gratitude.  Thus, 
if  we  would  come  to  the  great  practical  result  of  all 
religious  truth,  let  us  be  convinced,  and  feel,  that  "  God 
is  all  in  all."  "  Of  him,  and  through  him,  and  to  him, 
are  all  things ;  and  to  him,  to  him  who  made  us,  and 
blesses  us,  and  guides  us  to  heaven,  to  Him  be  glory 
for  ever  and  ever." 


IV 


ON    FUTURE    PUNISHMENT, 

1  HAVE  hesitated  about  introducing  this  subject,  in 
the  present  course  of  observations,  because  there  is  no 
question  upon  it  that  does,  accurately  speaking,  divide 
Orthodox  and  Liberal  Christians.  The  great  ques- 
tion, about  the  duration  of  future  punishment,  has 
been  brought  very  little  into  debate  between  the  par- 
ties, and  it  has  no  particular  connexion  with  any  of 
the  speculative  questions  that  are  in  debate.  If  Uni- 
versalism,  considered  as  a  denial  of  all  future  punish- 
ment, has  more  affinity  with  any  one  theological  sys- 
tem than  another,  it  undoubtedly  is  Calvinism  ;  and  it 
is  a  well  known  fact,  that  it  originally  sprung  from 
Calvinism,  and  existed  in  the  closest  connexion  with  it. 

Still,  however,  since  it  is  latterly  urged,  by  the  Or- 
fliodox,  that  there  is  a  great  difference  between  them 
and  their  opponents,  on  this  subject,  and  since,  as  I 
apprehend,  a  difference  does  exist  in  their  general 
views  and  speculations,  and  one  that  deserves  to  be 
discussed,  I  have  thought  proper  to  bring  it  into  the 
course  of  my  remarks. 

As  the  subject  has  been  very  little  discussed  among 
us,  I  shall  treat  it,  not  so  much  in  the  form  of  contro- 
versy, as  with  that  calm  and  dispassionate  disquisition, 
which  more  properly  belongs  to  a  theme  so  solemn  and 
weighty. 


106  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

I.  The  retribution  of  guilt  is  serious  in  the  contem- 
plation, and  must  be  severe  in  the  endurance.  The 
penal  suffering  of  a  guilty  mind,  ivherever,  and 
lohenever  it  comes,  must  he  great.  This,  to  me,  is  the 
first  and  clearest  of  all  truths,  with  regard  to  the  pun- 
ishment of  sin.  Even  experience  teaches  us  this ; 
and  Scripture,  with  many  words  of  awful  w^arning, 
confirms  the  darkest  admonitions  of  experience.  If 
sin  is  not  repented  of,  in  this  life,  then  its  punishment 
must  take  place  in  a  future  world. 

Of  the  miseries  of  that  future  state,  I  do  not  need 
the  idea  of  a  direct  infliction  from  God,  to  give  me  a 
fearful  impression.  Of  all  the  unveiled  horrors  of  that 
world,  nothing  seems  so  terrific,  as  the  self-inflicted 
torture  of  a  guilty  conscience.  It  will  be  enough  to 
fill  the  measure  of  his  woe,  that  the  sinner  shall  be  left 
to  himself ;  that  he  shall  be  left  to  the  natural  conse- 
quences of  his  wickedness.  In  the  universe,  there  are 
no  agents  to  w^ork  out  the  misery  of  the  soul,  like  its 
own  fell  passions  ;  not  the  fire,  the  darkness,  the  flood, 
or  the  tempest.  Nothing,  within  the  range  of  our  con- 
ceptions, can  equal  the  dread  silence  of  conscience,  the 
calm  desperation  of  remorse,  the  corroding  of  ungrati- 
fied  desire,  the  gnawing  worm  of  envy,  the  bitter  cup 
of  disappointment,  the  blighting  curse  of  hatred. 
These,  pushed  to  their  extremity,  may  be  enough  to 
destroy  the  soul ;  as  lesser  sufferings,  in  this  world, 
are  sometimes  found  to  destroy  the  reason. 

But  whatever  that  future  calamity  will  be,  I  believe 
it  is  the  highest  idea  we  can  form  of  it,  to  suppose  that 
it  is  of  the  sinner's  own  procuring  ;  that  the  burden  of 
his  transgressions  will  fall  upon  him,  by  its  own  Aveight ; 
not  be  hurled  upon  him,  as  a  thunder-bolt  from  heaven. 
If  we  should  suppose  a  wicked  man  to  live  always  on 
earth,  and  to  proceed  in  his  career  of  iniquity,  adding 


ON    FUTURE    PUNISHMENT.  107 

sin  to  sin,  arming  conscience  with  new  terrors,  gather- 
ing and  enhancmg  all  horrible  diseases  and  distempers, 
and  increasing  and  accumulating  the  load  of  infamy 
and  woe  ;  this  might  give  us  some  faint  idea  of  the 
extent  to  which  sin  may  go  in  another  w^orld. 

This,  then,  is  not  a  subject  to  be  treated  lightly,  nor 
with  any  heat  or  passion  ;  but  should  be  taken  home 
to  the  most  solemn  contemplation  and  deep  solicitude 
of  every  accountable  being. 

11.  My  second  remark  is,  that  the  scriptural  repre- 
sentations of  futiue  punishment  are  not  literal  nor 
definite. 

That  they  are  not  literal  is  manifest  from  the  con- 
sideration, that  they  are  totally  inconsistent,  if  taken 
literally.  If  there  is  a  lake  of  fire,  there  cannot  be  a 
gnawing  worm.  If  it  is  blackness  of  darkness,  it  can- 
not be  a  flaming  deluge  of  fire.  If  it  is  death  and  de- 
struction, literally,  it  cannot  be  sensible  pam.  If  it  is 
the  loss  of  the  soul,  it  cannot  be  the  suffering  of  the 
soul.  And  yet  all  these  representations  are  used  to 
describe  the  future  misery.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that 
all  cannot  be  literally  true.  To  suppose  them  literal, 
indeed,  would  be  to  make  the  future  world  like  the 
present ;  for  they  are  all  drawn  from  present  objects, 
r^either  are  these  representations  definite.  It  is  not  a 
definite  idea,  but  "  a  certain  fearful  looking-for  of  judg- 
ment," that  is  given  to  us,  in  the  present  state.  We 
know  nothing  about  the  particular  place,  or  the  parti- 
cular circumstances  of  a  future  punishment.  If  these 
things  are  not  literally  described,  it  follows,  indeed,  that 
they  are  not  definitely.  For,  the  moment  these  de- 
scriptions cease  to  be  literal,  they  cease  to  furnish  ideas 
of  anything  that  is  tangible,  of  anything  that  can  be- 
long to  place  or  circumstance,  of  anything  that  has 
dimensions,  shape,  or  elements.     That  is  to  say,  they 


108  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

are  figurative.  They  serve  but  to  throw  a  deeper 
shadow  over  the  dark  abyss ;  and  leave  us,  not  to  pry 
into  it  with  curiosity,  but  to  tremble  with  fear.  Indeed, 
the  very  circumstance,  that  the  future  woe  is  un- 
knoion,  is,  in  itself,  a  most  awful  and  appalling  cir- 
cumstance. It  may  be,  that  the  revelation  of  it  comes 
to  us  in  general  and  ambiguous  terms,  for  this  very 
purpose.  There  is  really  something  more  alarming  in 
a  certain  fearful  looking-for  of  judgment,  than  in  the 
definite  knowledge  of  it. 

Neither,  as  I  believe,  are  those  terms,  which  describe 
the  duration  of  future  misery,  definite.  Indeed,  why 
should  they  be  more  definite,  than  those  which  relate 
to  place  or  circumstance  ?  In  passages  where  all  else 
is  figurative,  and  that  in  so  very  high  a  degree,  why 
may  it  not  be  suspected  that  what  relates  to  the  time 
may  be  figurative  ?  This  suspicion,  drawn  from  the 
connected  phraseology,  may  derive  additional  strength 
from  the  subject,  about  which  the  language  in  ques- 
tion is  employed.  It  is  the  future,  the  indefinite,  the 
unknown  state.  Whatever  stretches  into  the  vast  fu- 
turity, is  to  us  eternal.  We  can  grasp  no  thought  of 
everlasting,  but  that  it  is  indefinite.  You  may  bring 
this  argument  home  to  your  own  feelings,  if  you  sup- 
pose that  you  had  been  called  to  describe  some  future 
and  awful  calamity,  which  was  vast,  indefinite,  un- 
known, terrible  ;  if  you  consider  whether  you  would 
not,  with  these  views,  have  adopted  phraseology  as 
strong,  as  unlimited,  as  you  find  in  the  Scriptures  on 
this  subject.  If,  then,  our  idea  of  future  punishment 
extends  so  far  as  to  provide  for  the  full  strength  of  the 
language  used ;  if  our  theory  provide  for  the  terms  to 
be  explained  by  it,  is  it  not  sufficient  ?  does  it  not  go 
far  enough  ? 

To  these  considerations,  relating  to  the  language 


ON    FUTURE    PUNISHMENT.  109 

and  the  principles  of  interpretation  that  ought  to  be 
apphed  to  it,  let  it  be  observed  in  addition,  that  the 
oriental  style  was  habitually  and  very  highly  meta- 
phorical, and  is  to  be  explained  by  the  impression  it 
would  naturally  make  on  those  who  were  accustomed 
to  it ;  and  that  even  among  us,  with  our  cooler  imagi- 
nations, the  terms  in  question,  such  as  "  for  ever,"  (fcc, 
are  used  figuratively,  are  applied  to  hmited  periods, 
and  this  on  the  most  common  occasions  and  subjects. 
To  take  one  instance  for  all,  as  being  the  strongest  of 
all :  there  is  no  higher  or  more  unqualified  description 
of  the  endurance  of  future  misery,  than  that  which 
says,    "their  worm  dieth  not,    and  the   fire    is    not 
queriched."     Now  it  has  been  very  plausibly  argued 
thus ;  that  "  if  ever  the  time  comes  when  their  worm 
shall'die  ;  if  ever  there  shall  be  a  quenching  of  the 
fire  at  all ;  then  it  is  not  true,  that  their  worm  dieth 
not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched."^     And  the  argu- 
ment might  be  as  conclusive  as  it  is  plausible,  were  it 
not  for  a  single  passage  in  the  Old  Testament,  which 
apphes  the  same  language  to  a  punishment  confessedly 
temporary.     It  is  the  closing  passage  of  Isaiah  ;  "and 
they  shall   go  forth,"   that   is,  from   Jerusalem,   and 
probably  to  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  where  it  is  well 
known,  that  carcasses  were  thrown,  and  an  almost 
perpetual  fire  kept  to  consume  them;  "And  they  shall 
go  forth,  and  shall  look  upon  the  carcasses  of  the  men 
who  have  transgressed  against  me ;    for  their  worm 
shall  not  die,  neither  shall  their  fire  be  quenched,  and 
they  shall  be  an  abhorring  to  all  flesh." 

I  shall  only  remark  farther,  upon  the  Scripture  repre- 
sentations, that  there  is  an  ambiguity,  a  generaUty,  a 
vastness,  a  terror  about  them,  that  seems  fitted  to  check 
our  confident  reasonings.     It  is  enough  for  us  to  fear. 
*  Jonathan  Edwards. 

10 


110  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

To  speculate  much,  seems  not  our  wisdom.  Yet  if  we 
will  speculate ;  if  we  can  dispute  on  such  a  subject ;  if 
we  can  wrangle  about  texts  and  interpretations,  and 
claim  the  full  amount  and  force  of  every  passage  and 
statement,  it  may  be  well  for  us  to  be  reminded,  that 
we  shall  only  confound  ourselves,  in  our  haste,  and 
destroy  the  positions  we  take,  in  our  eagerness  to 
defend  them.  For  if  any  one  shall  insist  on  the  full 
force  of  those  declarations,  that  denounce  everlasting 
misery ;  his  adversary  may  as  fairly  take  his  stand  on 
the  opposite  texts,  which  declare  that  God  will  have 
all  rnen  to  be  saved ;  that  Jesus  came  to  destroy  death; 
that  death  is  swallowed  up  of  life.  Or  if  any  one  shall 
confine  himself  to  the  words  eternal,  unquenchable, 
(fee,  and  will  allow  them  no  modification,  I  see  not 
how  he  can  fairly  deny  to  his  adversary  the  equal  right 
of  adhering  to  the  representations  of  death,  destruction, 
loss  of  the  soul,  or  in  other  words,  of  annihilation, 
which  are  applied  to  the  same  subject.  Nay,  the  latter 
will  seem  to  have  the  advantage  in  the  argument,  for 
annihilation  is  an  everlastmg  calamity.  But  not  to 
dwell  on  this ;  the  ambiguity  mentioned,  furnishes  an 
answer  to  an  important  objection  to  our  views.  It  is 
said,  if  future  misery  is  not  literally  eternal,  Avhat  rea- 
son is  there  to  think  that  future  happiness  is  so  ?  for 
the  same  terms  are  brought  to  describe  both.  I  answer 
that  neither  of  them  depend  on  general  terms ;  that 
we  are  to  look  for  our  belief  on  all  these  subjects  to  the 
scope  and  tenor  of  the  sacred  writing ;  and  that,  in 
particular,  the  promises  of  future  happiness  are  all 
consistent,  and  leave  no  obscurity  nor  doubt.  It  is  life, 
peace,  rest ;  knowledge,  perfection  ;  glory,  blessedness. 
But  the  threatenings  of  future  evil  are  ambiguous,  dark, 
obscure,  and  if  taken  literally,  inconsistent.  It  is  life, 
and  death ;  being  tormented,  and  being  destroyed.    It 


ON    FUTURE    PUNISHMENT.  HI 

leaves  therefore  a  vague  but  fearful  impression.  And 
such,  it  seems  to  me,  were  the  Scriptures  intended  to 
leave ;  the  impression  of  some  vast  and  tremendous 
calamity,  without  precisely  informing  us  what  it  is. 

I  cannot  close  this  topic  without  offering  one  or  two 
observations,  independent  of  the  Scripture  arguments, 
which  seem  to  me  of  great  weight. 

There  is  one  tremendous  bearing  of  the  doctrine  of 
literally  eternal  punishment,  the  bare  statement  of 
which  seems  to  me  almost  enough  to  decide  the  ques- 
tion. Take  the  instance  of  a  child  ;  one  who  hast  just 
begun  to  be  a  moral  agent ;  let  the  age  be  what  it  may ; 
we  need  not  now  decide  :  suppose  that  it  has  just  come 
to  the  capacity  of  being  sinful  or  holy ;  that  it  has  pos- 
sessed this  capacity  one  hour  or  one  day ;  that  during 
this  brief  period  it  has  been  selfish,  passionate,  unholy 
— a  case  not  uncommon,  I  fear :  that  in  short  it  has 
possessed,  during  this  brief  period  of  its  probation,  a 
character,  which  the  gospel  does  not  approve,  which  it 
condemns,  which  it  threatens :  and  can  you  believe 
that  this  child,  in  ignorance,  in  imbecility,  in  tempta- 
tions ;  with  passions  unconsciously  nurtured  in  the 
sleep  of  infancy,  which  are  now  breaking  forth ;  with 
scarcely  any  force  of  reason  to  restrain  them ;  with  but 
a:  shght  knowledge  of  God,  with  not  a  thought  of  futu- 
rity ;  that  this  child,  the  creature  of  weakness  and 
ignorance,  is  actually,  and  in  one  single  day,  setting 
the  seal  to  a  misery  that  is  eternal,  and  eternally  in- 
creasing ;  to  a  misery  which  must  therefore,  in  the 
event,  mfinitely  surpass  all  that  the  world,  in  all  the 
periods  of  its  duration,  has  suffered  or  will  suffer?  Yet 
this  is  the  doctrine ;  this  is  one  essential  form  of  the 
doctrine  of  literally  eternal  punishment ;  and  if  you 
cannot  believe  this,  as  I  am  persuaded,  if  you  feel  the 


112  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

case  you  cannot,  you  cannot  believe  the  doctrine  at  all 
in  any  form. 

There  is  another  observation  which  seems  to  me 
equally  conclusive.  The  doctrine,  as  it  appears  to  me, 
destroys  the  natural  proofs  of  the  goodness  of  God.  Let 
it  be  observed,  that  every  question  about  this  subject 
may  be  resolved  into  this  :  Is  human  life  a  blessing  ? 
If  not,  to  what  purpose  is  all  that  can  be  said  about  the 
order,  beauty,  richness  and  kindly  adaptations  of  this 
earthly  system  ?  What  is  it  to  me,  that  the  heavens 
are  glorious  to  behold,  that  the  earth  is  fair  to  look 
upon  ;  what  to  me  that  I  dwell  in  a  splendid  mansion  ; 
if  on  the  whole  I  have  more  reason  to  be  sorrowful 
than  to  be  happy ;  if  I  have  more  to  fear  than  to  hope ; 
if  life  is  more  to  be  lamented  than  desired  ;  if  it  is  a 
subject  more  of  regret  than  gratitude  ?  Is  human  life, 
then,  a  blessing?  To  deu}^  it,  is  impiety.  To  deny 
it,  is  to  take  away  all  grounds  of  religious  trust  and 
devotion,  all  grounds  of  believing  in  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures, and  in  Jesus.  For  if  God  is  not  good,  we  can 
have  no  confidence  in  his  rectitude  or  veracity.  If  God 
is  not  good,  we  cannot  know  but  he  may  deceive  us, 
with  even  miraculous  proofs  of  falsehood.  Our  life, 
then,  is  a  blessing :  that  is,  it  is  a  thing  to  be  desired. 
Now  the  question  is,  whether,  when  it  is  so  difficult  to 
form  the  character,  which  is  required  for  future  happi- 
ness ;  when  it  is  so  possible  to  fail ;  when  the  unerring 
Scriptures  are  so  full  of  awful  warnings ;  whether  any 
rational  being  Avould  desire  existence,  on  the  terrible 
condition,  that  if  he  did  once  fail,  he  would  fail  forever ; 
that  if  he  did  fail  in  this  short  life,  he  must  sink  to  a 
helpless,  remediless,  everlasting  woe.  The  word  eter- 
nity passes  easily  from  our  lips,  but  consider  what  it 
imports  ;  consider  it  deeply,  and  then  say:  who  would 
think  it  a  favour  to  take  so  tremendous  a  risk?    Could 


ON    FLTURE    PUNISHMENT.  113 

any  one  of  us  have  been  brought  into  being,  for  one 
moment,  in  the  maturity  of  his  facukies,  to  decide  on 
such  a  proposal,  to  decide  a\  hether  he  should  take  such 
a  hazard,  surely,  he  would  make  the  refusal,  with  a 
strength  of  emotion,  with  a  horror  of  feeling,  that  would 
be  enough  to  destroy  as  it  passed  over  him.  "No! 
no  !"  he  would  exclaim,  "  save  me  from  that  trial :  let 
me  be  the  nothing  that  I  was :  there  at  least  is  safety : 
save  me  from  the  paths  of  life,  that  conduct  such  mul- 
titudes—and why  not  me  ? — down  to  everlasting  and 
ever-living  death  !"  Now,  let  us  ask,  can  it  be  that  the 
all-powerful  and  infinitely  benevolent  God  has  brought 
beings  into  existence  in  circumstances  that  deserve  to 
be  thus  regarded  ;  that  he  has  given  them  life  so  fated, 
so  perilous,  that  if  they  could  comprehend  it,  if  it  were 
not  for  their  ignorance — they  would  abhor  the  gift  as 
an  infinite  curse  ? 

There  are  various  degrees  and  shades  of  religious 
belief^  and  much  that  is  called  such  is  so  low  upon  the 
scale,  as  scarcely  to  differ  from  downright  skepticism. 
And  I  have  often  been  ready  to  ask,  when  I  have  sur- 
veyed the  aspects  of  life  around  me,  whether  men  do 
really  believe  on  this  subject,  what  is  written  in  their 
creed.  There  are  those,  I  know,  who  have  found  a 
gieat  difference  between  asserting  and  believing  in 
this  case  ;  who,  when  they  came  to  be  impressed  with 
this  doctrine,  felt  as  if  all  the  cheerfulness  of  life  was 
the  most  horrible  insensibility ;  and  as  if  all  the  light 
that  was  around  them,  the  light  that  rested  on  the 
fair  scenes  of  nature,  was  turned  into  darkness  and 
gloom  :  felt  as  if  all  that  is  bright  and  gladdening,  in 
the  general  aspects  of  society  and  of  the  world,  was 
the  most  treacherous  and  terrible  illusion  !  And  is  it 
not  so,  if  the  popular  doctrine  be  true  ?  I  see  a  busy, 
toiling,  and  oftentimes  joyous  multitude,  thronging  the 
10* 


114  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

villages  and  cities  of  the  world  ;  liundreds  of  millions 
of  human  beings,  to  whom  happiness  is  more  than  life, 
and  misery  more  than  death.  I  see  childhood,  lovely 
childhood,  with  its  opening  moral  faculties,  in  ten 
thousand  bosoms,  throbbing  with  new  and  glad  exis- 
tence. I  see  the  whole  world,  dwellinsf  in  an  isfno- 
ranee,  or  a  moral  unconsciousness,  almost  like  that  of 
childhood  ;  and  are  they,  all  around  me,  every  hour, 
by  hundreds  and  by  thousands;  dropping  into  a  region 
of  woes  and  agonies  and  groans,  never  to  be  relieved 
or  terminated  ?  Gracious  heaven !  if  one  tenth  part  of 
the  human  race  were  the  next  year  to  die  amidst  the 
horrors  of  famine,  that  evil,  light  as  it  is  in  the  compa- 
rison, would  cover  the  earth  with  a  universal  mourning ! 

How  evident  is  it,  then,  that  men  have  nothing  ap- 
proaching to  a  belief,  of  what  the  popular  creed  avers 
on  this  awful  subject.  I  do  not  bring  this  as  an  argu- 
merit  against  the  doctrine  it  lays  down.  But  I  do 
maintain,  that  men  should  believe  what  they  say,  be- 
fore they  condemn  those  Avho  cannot  say  so  much ;  that 
they  should  feel  the  trial  of  faith,  before  they  decide 
on  the  propriety  of  a  doubt. 

I  may  be  told  that  what  I  have  been  saying  is  not 
Scripture,  but  reasoning.  I  know  it  is  reasoning.  I 
have  already  shown,  as  I  think,  that  the  Scriptures  do 
not  warrant  the  doctrine  that  is  commonly  deduced 
from  them ;  and  to  my  mind,  the  reasoning  I  have 
used  strongly  enforces  the  rejection  of  it. 

III.  But  I  hasten  to  my  final  remark  ;  which  is,  that 
the  Scriptures  reveal  our  future  danger,  whatever  it  be, 
for  the  purpose  of  alarming  us  ;  and  therefore,  that  to 
speculate  on  this  subject,  in  order  to  lessen  our  fear  of 
sinning,  involves  the  greatest  hazard  and  impiety. 
There  is  a  high  moral  use,  and  it  is  the  only  use  for 
which  the  awful  revelation  of  "  the  powers  of  the  world 


ON    FUTURE    PUNISHMENT.  115 

to  come"  was  intended,  and  most  evidently  and  emi- 
nently fitted  ;  and  that  is,  to  awaken  fear.  Whatever 
else  the  language  in  question  means,  it  means  this. 
About  other  topics  relating  to  it,  there  may  be  ques- 
tions ;  about  this,  none  at  all.  And  after  all  that  has 
been  said,  I  shall  not  hesitate  to  add,  that  we  are  in 
no  danger  of  really  believing  too  much,  or  fearing  too 
much.  And  this  is  my  answer,  if  any  should  object  to 
the  moral  tendency  of  the  views  that  have  been  of- 
fered :  I  maintain  that  a  man  should  fear  all  that  he 
can^  and  I  actually  hold  a  belief,  that  affords  the  fullest 
scope  for  such  a  feeling.  It  is  not  of  so  much  conse- 
quence that  any  one  should  use  fearful  words  on  this 
subject,  and  even  violently  contend  for  thenj,  as  that 
he  should  himself  fear  and  tremble. 

And  I  repeat,  that  there  is  reason.  For  if  we  adopt 
any  opinion,  short  of  the  most  blank  and  bald  Univer- 
salism,  it  cannot  fail  to  be  serious.  Will  you  embrace 
the  idea  of  a  literal  destruction?  Imagine,  then,  if 
possible,  what  it  is  to  be  no  more  for  ever  !  Look  down 
into  the  abyss  of  dark  and  dismal  annihilation.  Think 
with  yourself,  what  it  would  be,  if  all  which  you  call 
yourself,  your  mind,  your  life,  your  cherished  being, 
were  to  fall  into  the  jaws  of  everlasting  death  !  There 
is  something  dreadful  beyond  utterance  in  the  thought 
of  annihilation  ;  to  go  away  from  the  abodes  of  life,  to 
quit  our  hold  of  life  and  being  itself ;  to  be  nothing — 
nothing,  forever  !  while  the  glad  universe  should  go 
onward  in  its  brightness  and  its  glory,  and  myriads  of 
beings  should  live  and  be  happy  ;  and  all  their  dwell- 
ings, and  all  their  worlds  should  be  overspread  with 
life  and  beauty  and  joy  !  Imagine  it,  if  you  can. 
Think,  that  the  hour  of  last  farewell  to  all  this  had 
come  :  think  of  the  last  moment,  of  the  last  act,  of  the 
last  thought ;  and  that  thought  annihilation  !     Oh  ! 


116  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

it  would  be  enough  to  start  with  its  energy  your  whole 
being  into  a  new  life  ;  methinks,  you  would  spring 
with  agony  from  the  verge  of  the  horrible  abyss,  and 
cry  for  life,  for  existence — though  it  were  woe  and  tor- 
ment !  Shall  we  then  prefer  the  hope  of  long  and  re- 
medial suffering  ?  Then  carry  forward  your  thoughts 
to  that  dark  world,  where  there  shall  be  "no  more 
sacriJSce  for  sin,"  no  more  Saviour  to  call  and  win  us, 
no  more  mild  and  gentle  methods  of  restoration ; 
where  sin  must  be  purged  from  us,  if  at  all,  '•  so  as  by 
fire."  Carry  forward  your  thoughts  to  that  dark  strug- 
gle with  the  powers  of  retribution,  where  every  malig- 
nant and  hateful  passion  will  wage  the  fearful  war 
against  the  soul ;  where  habit,  too,  will  have  bound 
and  shackled  the  soul  with  its  everlasting  chams  of 
darkness  ;  and  its  companions,  fiends  like  itself,  shall 
only  urge  it  on  to  sin.  "When  will  the  struggle  cease  ? 
K  sin  cannot  be  resisted  now,  in  this  world  of  means, 
and  motives,  and  mercies,  how  shall  it  be  resisted  then  7 
When  or  how  shall  the  miserable  soul  retrieve  its 
steps  ?  From  what  depth  of  eternity  shall  it  trace 
back  its  way  of  ages  ?  God  only  knows.  To  us  it  is 
not  given.  But  Ave  know  that  the  retribution  of  a 
sinful  soul  is  what  we  ought  above  all  things  to  fear. 
For  thus  are  we  instructed.  "Fear  not  them  that, 
after  they  have  killed  the  body,  have  no  more  that 
they  can  do  :  but  fear  him  who  is  able  to  destroy  both 
soul  and  body  in  hell ;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  fear  him," 
We  know  not  what  it  is;  but  we  know  that  such 
terms  and  phrases  as  we  read  ;  "  the  wrath  to  come  ; 
the  worm  that  dieth  not ;  the  fire  that  is  not  quenched ; 
the  blackness  of  darkness;  the  fier}^  indignation:" 
that  these  words  not  only  import  what  is  fearful,  but 
were  intended  to  inspire  a  salutary  dread.  We  know 
not  what  it  is  ;  but  we  have  heard  of  one  who  lifted 


ON    FUTURE    PUNISHMENT.  117 

up  his  eyes  being  in  torment,  and  saw  the  regions  of 
the  blessed  afar  off,  and  cried  and  said,  "  Father  Abra- 
ham, have  mercy  on  me  !  for  I  am  tormented  in  this 
flame."  We  know  not  what  it  is  ;  but  we  know  that 
the  finger  of  inspiration  has  pointed  awfully  to  that 
world  of  calamity.  We  know  that  inspired  prophets 
and  apostles,  when  the  interposing  veil  has  been,  for  a 
moment,  drawn  before  them,  have  shuddered  with  hor- 
ror at  the  spectacle.  We  know  that  the  Almighty 
himself  has  orathered  and  accumulated  all  the  imaoes 
of  earthly  distress  and  ruin,  not  to  show  us  what  it  is, 
but  to  warn  us  of  what  it  may  be  ;  that  he  has  spread 
over  this  world  the  deep  shadows  of  his  displeasure, 
leaving  nothing  to  be  seen,  and  everything  to  be 
dreaded  !  And  thus  has  he  taught  us,  what  I  would 
lay  down,  as  the  moral  of  these  observations,  and  of 
all  my  reflections  on  this  subject,  that  it  is  not  our 
ivisdom  to  speculate^  hut  to  fear  ! 


CONCLUSION.  THE  MODES  OF  ATTACK  UPON  LIB- 
ERAL CHRISTIANITY,  THE  SAME  THAT  WERE 
USED  AGAINST  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 
AND    REFORMERS. 

In  being  assailed  as  it  is,  Liberal  Christianity  meets 
but  with  the  fate  that  naturally  attends,  and  actually 
has  attended  all  improvement.  Whether  our  The- 
ology be  a  real  progress  of  truth  or  not,  this  general 
statement  will  not  be  questioned.  Every  great  ad- 
vancement in  science,  in  the  arts,  in  politics,  has  had 
to  encounter  this  hostility.  No  cause  has  been,  or  is, 
more  bitterly  opposed,  than  the  cause  of  political  liber- 
ty. So  it  has  been  with  religion.  Christianity  had  to 
struggle  long  with  the  hostility  of  the  world.  Its  doc- 
trines were  opposed  and  its  friends  reproached.  And 
when  it  declined  from  its  purity,  when  it  was  cor- 
rupted through  its  popularity,  through  its  prevalence, 
through  its  very  orthodoxy,  I  may  say ;  when  a  revi- 
val of  its  true  doctrines  was  needed ;  the  men  who 
stood  forward  in  that  work,  the  Reformers^  found  that 
innovation  was  still  an  offence,  that  dissent  was  heresy, 
that  truth  was  accounted  no  better  than  ruinous  and 
fatal  error. 

I  say  these  things,  in  the  general,  and  at  the  outset, 
not  to  prove,  nor  would  I  anywhere  pretend  to  prove 
by  such  an  argument,  that  our  Theology  is  right,  but 
to  show  that  opposition  to  it  is  no  evidence  of  its  being 
wrong  ;  to  show  that  a  doctrine  may  be,  like  primitive 


CONCLUSION. 


119 


Christianity,  "  everywhere  spoken  against,"  and  yet  be 
a  true  doctrine.  For  there  are  many,  who  feel  from 
the  bare  circumstance,  that  a  system  is  so  much  re- 
proached, as  if  it  must  be  wrong  or  questionable  ;  and 
there  are  many  more,  who  suffer  their  opinions  to 
float  on  the  current  of  popular  displeasure,  without  in- 
quiring at  all  into  their  justice  or  validity.  Let  such 
remember  that  no  new  truths  ever  did,  nor,  till  men 
are  mucli  changed,  ever  can  enter  into  the  w^orld,  with- 
out this  odium  and  hostility  ;  and  let  them  not  account 
that,  which  may  be  the  very  seal  of  truth,  to  be  the 
brand  of  error ! 

I  will  now  proceed  to  notice  some  of  the  particular 
modes  of  attack  to  which  Liberal  Christianity  is  sub- 
ject, to  meet  these  assauUs  and  objections,  and  to  show 
that  in  being  subjected  to  these  assaults,  it  suffers  no 
new  or  singular  fate. 

I.    In  the  first  place,  then,  it  is  common  to  charge 
upon  new  opinions  all  the  accidents  attending  their 
progress;    to  blend    with    their   main    cause    all   the 
circumstances  that  happen  to  be  connected  wdth   it. 
This  is  perhaps  not  unnatural,  though  it  be  unjust. 
Men  hear  that  a  new  system  is  introduced,  that  a  new 
sect  is  rising.     They  know  nothing  thoroughly  about 
it,  but  they  are  inquiring  what  it  is.     In  this  state  of 
mind  they  meet,  not  with  a  Unitarian  book,  but  more 
likely  with  a  passage  from  a  book,  taken  from  its  con- 
nexion, culled  out,  it  is  probable,  on  purpose  to  make 
a  bad  impression,  and  forthwith  this  passage  is  made 
to  stand  for  the  system.     Whenever  Unitarianism  is 
mentioned,  the  obnoxious  paragraph  rises  to  mind,  and 
settles  all  questions  about  it,  at  once.     Or,  perhaps, 
some  act  or  behaviour  of  some  individual  in  this  new 
class  of  religionists  is  mentioned ;  and  this  is  henceforth 
considered  and  quoted  as  a  just  representation,  not  only 


120  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

of  the  whole  body,  but  of  their  principles  also.  Thus 
an  impediment  in  Paul's  speech  was  made  an  objection 
to  Christianity ;  an  objection  which  he  thought  it  neces- 
sary orravely  to  debate  with  the  church  in  Corinth. 

I  have  introduced  this  sort  of  objection  first,  not  only 
because  it  arises  naturally  out  of  a  man's  first  acquaint- 
ance with  Unitarianism,  but  because  it  gives  me  an 
opportunity  to  say,  before  I  proceed  any  further,  hoio 
much  of  what  passes  under  this  name,  it  is  necessary, 
as  I  conceive,  to  defend.  I  say,  then,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  defend  everything  that  passes  under  this  name, 
everything  that  every  or  any  Unitarian  has  written,  or 
said,  or  done.  So  obvious  a  disclamation  might  seem 
to  be  scarcely  needful ;  but  it  will  not  seem  so  to  any, 
who  have  observed  the  manner  in  which  things  of  this 
sort  are  charged  upon  us.  What  is  it  to  me  that  such 
and  such  persons  have  said,  or  written,  this  or  that 
thing?  What  is  it  to  the  main  cause  of  truth,  which 
we  profess  to  support,  or  to  the  great  questions  at 
issue  ?  In  the  circumstances  of  the  Unitarian  body, 
in  the  novelty  to  a  certain  extent  of  their  opinions,  in 
the  violent  opposition  they  meet  with,  I  see  exposures 
to  many  faults  ;  to  excesses  and  extravagances,  to  mis- 
takes and  errors.  I  could  strike  oflf  half  of  the  opinions 
and  suggestions,  that  have  sprung  up  from  this  pro- 
gress of  inquiry,  and  still  retain  a  body  of  unspeakably 
precious  truth.  There  are  several  things,  and  some 
things  of  considerable  practical  moment,  which  I  seri- 
ously doubt,  whether  we,  as  a  denomination,  have  yet 
come  to  view  rightly.  The  violence  of  opposition  has, 
undoubtedly,  in  some  respects,  carried  us  to  an  extreme, 
in  some  points  of  opinion  and  practice.  And  certainly 
I  find  things  in  our  writings,  which,  in  my  judgment, 
are  indefensible.  What  less  can  be  said,  if  we  retain 
any  independence,  or  sobriety,  or  discrimination  about 


CONCLUSION.  121 

US  ?  What  less  can  be  said  of  any  fallible  body  of  men  ; 
of  any  body,  comprising,  as  all  denominations  do,  all 
sorts  of  men,  all  sorts  of  writers  and  thinkers  7  If  they 
are  not  inspired,  they  must  be  sometimes  wrong". 

Nay,  to  bring  this  nearer  home,  it  were  folly  for  any 
one  of  us  to  contend  that  everything  he  has  said  or 
written  is  right,  or  even  that  it  is  done  with  a  right 
spirit.  Here  is  a  conflict  of  opinions,  the  eagerness  of 
dispute,  the  perverting  influence  of  controversy.  Here 
is  an  effervescence  of  the  general  mind.  The  moral 
elements  of  the  world  are  shaken  together,  if  not  more 
violently,  yet  more  intimately  perhaps,  than  they  ever 
were  before.  If  any  man  can,  with  a  severe  calmness 
and  a  solemn  scrutiny,  sit  down  and  meditate  upon 
those  things  which  agitate  so  many  minds  ;  if  he  can 
separate  the  true  from  the  false,  and  say  a  fcAV  things, 
out  of  many,  that  are  exactly  right,  and  a  few  things 
more  that  are  helping  on  to  a  right  issue  ;  it  is,  per- 
haps, all  that  he  ought  to  expect.  How  much  dross 
there  may  be,  in  the  pure  gold  of  the  best  minds,  "  He 
that  sitteth  as  a  Refiner  "  only  can  knoAV. 

This,  I  confess,  is  my  view  of  our  controversies,  and 
of  all  human  controversies.  I  have  no  respect  in  this 
matter  for  authorities,  for  infallible  sentences,  or  for 
the  reverence  and  weight  that  are  given  to  sentences, 
because  they  are  uttered  by  some  leader  in  the  church, 
or  because  they  are  written  in  a  book.  I  have  no 
respect  for  the  spirit  of  quotation,  that,  having  brought 
forward  a  grave  proposition  from  some  synod,  or  coun- 
cil, or  book,  or  body  of  divinity,  holds  that  to  be  enough. 
All  men  err ;  all  synods,  and  councils,  and  consisto- 
ries, and  books  and  bodies  of  divinity ;  which  is  only 
saying,  that  they  all  do  that  in  the  aggregate  and  in 
form,  which  they  do  individually  and  necessarily. 
And  if  this  be  true,  if  these  views  be  just,  how  unrea- 
11 


122  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

sonable  is  it,  to  catch  up  sentences  here  and  there,  from 
any  class  of  writings,  and  erect  them  into  serious  and 
comprehensive  charges  ? 

The  real  and  proper  question  is  about  principles. 
Let  these  be  shown  to  be  wrong,  and  the  denomination 
that  abides  by  them  must  fall.  On  this,  the  only 
tenable  ground  for  any  reasonable  man,  I  take  my 
stand.  I  have  no  doubt  that  our  leading  principles  are 
true  ;  and  it  would  not,  in  the  slightest  degree,  disturb 
this  faith,  if  there  could  be  shown  me  ten  volumes  of 
indefensible  extracts  from  our  writings.  Whether  half 
a  volume  of  such,  out  of  the  hundred  that  have  been 
written,  can  be  produced,  I  leave  not  to  the  candour  of 
our  opponents  to  decide,  but  to  their  ingenuity  to  make 
out,  if  they  are  able.  The  constant  repetition  of  three 
or  four  stale  extracts,  garbled  from  the  writings  of 
Priestley  and  Belsham,  would  seem  to  show  that  the 
stock  of  invidious  quotations  is  very  small.  In  fact,  I 
do  consider  Unitarians,  in  comparison  with  any  other 
religious  body,  as  having  written  with  great  general 
propriety,  soberness  and  wisdom.  But  if  they  have 
not,  or  if  any  one  thinks  they  have  not,  it  will  very 
little  affect  the  general  truth  of  their  principles. 

And  how  ill,  let  me  ask,  could  any  other  body  of 
Christians  bear  this  sort  of  scrutiny?  How  easy  would 
it  be  to  select  from  Orthodox  writings,  and  even  from 
those  of  great  general  reputation,  a  mass  of  extracts 
that  would  make  the  whole  world  cry  out ;  one  part 
with  horror  at  their  enormity,  and  another  with  indig- 
nation at  their  being  presented  for  the  purpose  of  show- 
ing what  orthodoxy  is  !  It  would  be  unjust,  I  confess. 
It  would  disturb  no  independent  believer  in  that  system : 
and  as  little  ought  such  things  to  disturb  vis. 

I  have  now  noticed  the  first  feeling  of  objection  which 
naturally  arises  against  a  new  system ;    that  which 


CONCLUSION.  123 

proceeds  from  confounding  the  main  cause  with  the 
circumstances  that  attend  it. 

n.  But  another  objection,  and  that  perhaps  which 
is  first  put  in  form,  is  against  the  alleged  newness  of 
the  system.  It  is  said  that  this  religion  is  a  new  thing ; 
that  it  is  a  departure  from  the  faith  of  ages ;  that  it 
unsettles  the  most  established  notions  of  things,  and 
breaks  in  upon  the  order  and  peace  of  the  churches. 
I  state  this  objection  strongly  for  the  sake  of  our  oppo- 
nents, and  indeed  much  more  strongly  than  it  deserves 
to  be.  For  Unitarianism  professes,  so  far  from  being 
a  new  thing,  to  be  the  old,  pure,  primitive  Christianity. 
It  does  not  profess,  even  in  comparison  Avith  orthodoxy, 
to  be  essentially  a  new  thing,  but  only  so,  in  certain 
speculative  doctrines ;  and  still  less  is  it  the  friend  or 
promoter  of  disorder  and  disunion.  Nevertheless,  it  is, 
to  a  certain  extent,  a  new  thing,  and  it  occasions, 
through  the  objections  made  to  it,  much  disturbance. 

And  can  these,  I  ask,  be  valid  or  weighty  objections 
in  the  mouths  of  Christians  and  Protestants  ?  Chris- 
tianity was  once  a  new  thing.  The  Athenian  philoso- 
phers said  to  Paul,  no  doubt  with  as  much  contempt 
as  any  modern  questioner  could  feel,  "  We  would  know 
what  this  new  doctrine,  whereof  thou  speakest,  is." 
And  others  said,  "These  men  that  have  turned  the 
world  upside  down,  have  come  hither  also."  Yes, 
troublesome,  "  pestilent  fellows,"  "  movers  of  sedition," 
devisers  of  mischief,  and  '*  doers  of  evil,"  were  the  first 
propagators  of  Christianity  accounted,  and  were  not 
ashamed  thus  to  suffer  in  imitation  of  their  slandered 
Master.  And  the  Reformers  of  Christianity,  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  trod  in  the  same  steps,  and  in  like 
manner  had  their  "  names  cast  out  as  evil."  And  espe- 
cially was  it  objected  to  them,  that  they  departed  from 
the  faith  of  ages,  and  invaded  the  repose  of  time-hal- 


124  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

lowed  doctrines  and  institutions.  And  in  the  strong 
confidence,  ay,  the  strong  argument  of  the  majority, 
the  same  things  were  said  about  the  truth  as  are  now 
said  ;  the  same  cry  of  "the  church  is  in  danger"  was 
raised  ;  the  same  anathemas  were  pronounced  against 
dangerous  heresies  and  the  denying  of  the  faith.  The 
whole  scene  was  acted  over,  that  is  now  witnessed,  of 
an  exclusive  and  hostile  orthodoxy,  on  the  one  hand, 
and  a  firm  and  unyielding  dissent  on  the  other ;  only 
that  orthodoxy  could  then  command  the  inquisition 
and  the  rack  ;  and  now  it  only  sets  its  tribunal  on  the 
reputation  of  men,  and  subjects  the  mind  to  trials,  that 
in  some  instances  scarcely  fall  short  of  the  tortures  of 
the  rack.  This  has  always  been  the  fate  of  innova- 
tion, and,  perhaps,  it  always  must  be.  And  to  those 
who,  for  conscience'  sake,  draw  upon  themselves  this 
hostility  to  whatever  is  new,  I  would  say ;  think  it  not 
strange  concerning  this  fiery  trial,  as  though  any  strange 
thing  happened  to  you.  It  is  the  same  that  has  hap- 
pened to  the  reformers  of  faith,  to  the  witnesses  for 
truth,  in  all  ages.  Be  not  astonished  or  disheartened 
at  this.  Only  bear  it  patiently.  No  assault,  no  detrac- 
tion can  injure  you,  if  you  bear  them  with  the  spirit  of 
Christ.  Rather  will  they  benefit  you  unspeakably  and 
forever,  benefit  you  in  awakening  that  love,  and  meek- 
ness, and  humility,  the  trying  of  which  is  more  precious 
than  that  of  gold  which  perisheth.  '*  If  ye  be  reproached 
for  the  name  of  Christ,  if  ye  be  reproached  for  labouring 
to  rescue  his  name  and  his  religion  from  mistake  and 
injury,  "  happy  are  ye ;  for  the  spirit  of  glory  and  of 
God  resteth  on  you  !" 

III.  Another  method  of  attack  upon  Liberal  Christi- 
anity is  to  awaken  sentiments  of  pity  and  horror  against 
it.  I  am  not  about  to  deny  that  this  is  very  honestly 
done ;  but  I  do  say  that  it  is  an  unworthy  mode  of 


CONCLUSION.  125 

assault ;  that  it  appeals  not  to  the  judgment,  but  to  the 
passions ;  and  that  it  is  very  apt  to  be  the  strongest, 
in  the  weakest  hands.  To  put  on  a  solemn  counte- 
nance, to  speak  in  sepulchral  tones  of  awe  and  lamen- 
tation, to  warn  men  against  this  doctrine,  is  easy.  But, 
alas !  for  the  weakness  of  men,  if  it  is  an  instrument 
easily  wielded,  it  is  also  an  instrument  of  terrible  power 
with  the  superstitious,  the  timid  and  unreflecting.  A 
considerate  man,  a  man  who  respects  the  minds  and 
consciences  of  those  he  has  to  deal  with,  will  be  cautious 
how  he  takes  hold  of  such  a  weapon  as  this  :  a  weapon 
which  prevails  chiefly  with  human  weakness,  which 
strikes  the  very  part  of  our  nature  that  most  needs  to 
be  supported,  which  wounds  only  the  infirm,  and  over- 
whelms only  the  prostrate.  For  I  need  not  say,  that  it 
is  precisely  with  minds  in  this  situation  that  tones  of 
pity  and  horror  have  the  greatest  influence.  A  man 
of  independent  thought  and  vigorous  understanding, 
who  could  better  afford  to  bear  this  sort  of  influence,  is 
the  very  person  who  will  not  yield  to  it.  He  will  say 
indignantly,  "that  is  nothing  to  the  purpose.  That 
does  not  satisfy  me.  I  did  not  ask  you  to  warn  me, 
but  ""to  enlighten  me.  I  did  not  ask  you  to  weep,  but 
to  reason.  No  doubt  you  feel  as  you  say,  and  very 
sincerely  feel  thus  ;  it  is  not  your  sincerity  that  I  ques- 
tion, but  your  argument.  You  degrade  my  under- 
standing, when  you  attempt  to  work  upon  it  in  this 
manner.  I  was  made  to  think.  The  Lord  of  con- 
science has  given  me  liberty  to  inquire  ;  and  I  will  not 
be  subject  to  any  other  influence.  God  has  called  me 
to  liberty  ;  and  man  shall  not  lay  me  under  bondage." 
Nor  is  this  all.  Pity  and  horror  prove  nothing,  in- 
deed ;  but  it  is  moreover  a  matter  of  history,  that 
TRUTH  has  always  made  its  progress  amidst  the  jnty 
and  horror  of  men.  Yes  ;  it  has  come  thus  ;  amidst 
11* 


126  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

sighings  and  doubtings,  and  shakings  of  the  head,  and 
warnings  of  danger,  and  forebodings  of  evil.  Yes ;  it 
has  held  its  way,  through  tokens  like  these  ;  with  dark 
countenances  about  it,  and  loud  denunciations,  and 
woful  anathemas.  It  has  stood  up  and  spoken  in  the 
person  of  its  great  Teacher  ;  and  men  have  "gnashed 
their  teeth  and  rent  their  garments,"  at  its  voice.  It 
has  gone  forth  into  the  world,  with  its  devoted  Apos- 
tles, and  been  accounted  "the  offscouring  of  all  things." 
It  has  "prophesied  in  sackcloth,"  with  its  faithful  wit- 
nesses, and  borne  the  cross  of  ignominy  and  reproach. 
The  angry  Sanhedrim,  the  bloody  Inquisition,  the  dun- 
geon, the  rack,  the  martyr's  stake,  have  testified  to  the 
abhorrence  of  men  against  the  truth  ! 

I  do  not  say  that  the  truth  I  hold  is  worthy  of  this 
glorious  fellowship.  But  I  say  that  its  being  joined  in 
an}^  measure  to  this  fellowship,  does  not  prov  e  it  false. 
And  if  it  be  true,  as  I  solemnly  believe  it  is,  then  let  not 
its  advocates  claim  entire  exemption  from  the  trials  of 
their  elder  brethren.  It  will  go  on,  and  men  will 
speak  evil  of  it,  and  they  will  struggle  against  it,  and 
they  will  lament  and  weep ;  but  it  will  be  as  if  they 
lifted  up  their  voice  to  withstand  the  rolling  seasons, 
or  struggled  against  the  chariot  wheels  of  the  morning, 
or  poured  out  vain  tears  upon  the  mighty  stream  that 
is  to  bear  all  before  it.  I  say  this,  more  in  sorrow,  I 
hope,  than  in  scorn.  I  am  sorry  for  those  who  cannot 
see  this  matter  as  I  think  they  ought  to  see  it.  I  am 
sorry  for  the  unhappiness,  for  the  honest  grief,  which 
a  misplaced  pity,  and  an  uncharitable  zeal,  and  a  spirit 
of  reproach  and  condemnation,  give  them.  But  their 
grief,  save  for  its  own  sake,  moves  me  not  at  all.  I 
consider  it  as  a  penance  for  their  mistaken  hostility  to 
truth,  rather  than  a  fair  admonition  of  error.  I  be- 
lieve, and  can  believe  no  less,  that  this  unhappiness  is 


CONCLUSION.  127 

simply  the  fruit  of  error.  Uncharitableness  must  be 
unhappy ;  anger  Tnust  be  pamful ;  exclusion,  and 
anathematizing,  and  dooming  sincere  brethren  to  per- 
dition, 7nust  be  works  of  bitterness  and  grief.  I  won- 
der not,  that  a  man  should  weep  while  he  is  doing 
them  ;  my  only  wonder  is,  that  he  can  ever  do  them, 
and  not  weep  ! 

lY.  But  I  shall  now  proceed  to  consider  one  or  two 
objections  of  a  graver  character.  It  is  said,  that  the 
religion,  which  Unitarianism  teaches,  does  not  meet 
the  wants  of  human  nature,  that  it  does  not  satisfy 
the  mind,  that  it  fails  as  a  support  and  comfort  to  the 
soul.  I  recur  again  to  the  observation,  that  it  is  per- 
fectly natural  that  this  objection  should  be  brought 
against  new  views  of  religion  ;  simply  because  they 
are  new,  and  whether  they  are  true  or  not ;  and  there- 
fore, that  no  strange  thing  happens  to  them,  when 
they  are  thus  regarded.  If  you  take  away  some  parts 
of  a  religion  on  which  men  have  relied,  you  take  away 
some  part  of  their  rehance  ;  and  they  cannot  feel  for  a 
time,  as  if  anything  else  would  be  such  a  support  and 
satisfaction  to  them.  This  Avill  be  especially  true,  if 
you'introduce  simpler,  9.nd  more  rational  ideas  of  re- 
ligion. The  Jew  could  say  to  the  Christian,  "How 
many  feasts  and  holy-days,  and  sabbaths  and  new 
moons,  and  rites  and  ordinances,  on  which  my  soul 
relied,  have  you  removed  from  me  !"  The  Catholic 
could  say  of  the  Protestant,  "Where,  alas!  are  the 
masses  and  the  confessionals,  and  the  comfortable  ab- 
solutions, and  the  intercessions  of  saints,  for  him!" 
And  things  of  the  same  import,  concerning  the  more 
doctrinal  aspects  of  religion,  may  the  Calvinist  say  to 
the  Unitarian.  But  the  Christian  and  the  Protestant 
covild  reply  to  their  respective  opponents,  "We  have  a 
reliance  as  sure  and  satisfactory  as  yours ;  and  more 


128  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

sound  and  spiritual,  as  we  judge."  And  so  may  the 
Unitarian  say  to  the  Calvinist. 

But  let  us  g-o  into  the  real  merits  of  the  case.  What 
is  a  foimdation  and  a  support  in  religion,  and  whence 
does  true  comfort  arise  ?  Our  Savioiu'  speaks  of  a 
foundation,  when  he  says,  '•  he  that  heareth  my  words 
and  doefh  them,  I  will  liken  to  a  wise  man."  whose 
'•house  fell  not,  because  it  was  founded  on  a  rock."' 
Surely,  Unitarians  do  not  reject  this  foundation.  "  But 
our  own  endeavours  and  virtues  are  not  sufficient  of 
themselves."  Certainly  not :  and  Unitarians  may  rely, 
as  unfeignedly  as  their  brethren,  on  the  mercy  of  God, 
and  they  sincerely  profess  to  do  so.  This  satisfies 
them.  To  say,  that  it  does  not  satisfy  the  demands 
of  a  different  theolog\',  is  only  saying  that  the  spe- 
culations of  the  two  classes  differ.  "But,''  it  may  be 
contended,  "it  does  not  satisfy  the  icants  of  human 
nature^  This  is  a  matter  of  which  ever}-  one  must 
judge  from  the  feelings  of  his  own  mind.  As  the  Uni- 
tarian experiences  human  nature,  he  would  say  that 
the  simple  promise  of  God's  mercy  and  aid  to  his  hum- 
ble endeavours,  does  give  all  needful  satisfaction.  A 
certain  theory  of  the  divine  government  may  not  be 
satisfied;  the  superstitious  wants  of  human  nature 
may  not  be  satisfied :  but  the  Unitarian  believes  that 
its  real  wants  are. 

But  I  go  farther;  though  I  would  say  what  I  am 
about  to  say.  with  all  reasonable  and  fair  qualifica- 
tions. I  feel  obliged  to  use  increasing  caution  in  all 
general  representations.  There  are  men  too  intelli- 
gent and  ?ood  in  every  class  of  Christians,  to  be  very 
much  affected  by  a  formal  creed.  Nevertheless,  I 
have  not  a  doubt,  that  there  are  many  to  whom  the 
popular  religion  furnishes  grounds  of  support  and  satis- 
faction, which  are   not  right   and  rational  grounds. 


CONCLUSION.  129 

The  regular  plan  and  process  of  religious  experience, 
the  defined  steps  and  dates  ;  an  exact  time  and  mo- 
ment of  conversion,  and  the  certainty  of  salvation  after 
that ;  the  efficacy  of  the  act  of  faith,  distinguished  as 
it  often  is  from  the  general  efficacy  of  a  holy  life  ;  "  the 
view  of  Christ,"  and  of  the  atonement  as  relieving  the 
sinner  from  his  burden ;  "  the  rolling  off  of  the  burden 
of  sin,"  as  it  is  often  called ;  the  notions  of  a  founda- 
tion, and  a  hope,  and  a  joy,  disconnected  as  they  are 
from  the  result  of  long-tried  virtue  and  piety ;  the  idea 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  alone  doing  the  "effectual  work" 
of  salvation  in  man,  doing  it  by  a  special  interposition 
after  all  the  sinner's  efforts  are  over,  and  he  is  brought 
to  despair  of  himself ;  these  views,  as  I  believe,  furnish 
a  fallacious  support,  and  comfort,  and  relief,  to  many. 
I  would  lay  a  weight  upon  man's  responsibility,  which 
is,  no  doubt,  disagreeable  to  him.  I  would  tell  a  sinful 
man,  that  anxiety  is  more  becoming  to  him  than 
confidence  and  repose.  He  is  indeed  to  confide  and 
repose  in  the  mercy  of  God  and  the  interposition  of 
Christ;  but  these  no  more  avail  him,  than  to  tell  him 
that  there  is  wealth  in  store  for  his  industry.  So  far 
as  his  own  part  is  concerned,  it  is  industry,  it  is  work- 
ing, continual  working,  daily  accumulation,  that  is  to 
make  him  rich  towards  God.  I  would  tell  him  that 
believijig  is  virtually  the  same  as  doing ;  and  that  it  is 
this  doing,  this  constant  doing,  and  this  alone,  that  can 
roll  away  the  burden  of  sin.  In  short,  I  would  say 
that  for  a  sinful  man  to  attain  to  the  favour  of  God  and 
to  heaven,  is  the  same  as  for  an  intemperate  man  to 
attain  to  sobriety  and  virtue ;  that  it  is  what  he  must 
do,  every  day  and  hour,  day  by  day  and  hour  by  hour, 
striving,  watching,  guarding,  praying,  keeping  himself 
under  perpetual  restraint,  till  he  is  redeemed  from  his 
iniquity.     In  other  words,  I  would  strive  to  represent 


130  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

this  matter  rationally ;  and  would  say.  that  the  sinner 
is  to  become  a  holy  man,  just  as  the  ignorant  is  to 
become  a  learned  man,  by  little  and  little,  by  con- 
stant accumulations,  by  gaining  one  truth  to-day  and 
another  to-morrow,  by  perpetual  progress. 

Now  I  do  not  deny  that  these  things,  in  the  general, 
are  taught  by  Calvinists ;  but  then  I  maintain  that 
they  are  commonly  taught  in  such  a  way,  that  they 
are  so  mixed  up  with  certain  doctrines,  as  that  their 
pressure  upon  the  soul  is  relieved :  so  that  a  man  does 
not  feel  that  he  is  to  become  a  Christian  just  as  he  is 
to  become  a  rich  man,  or  a  skilful,  or  a  wise  man. 
He  does  not  feel  this  pressure  of  necessity  upon  him, 
every  morning,  and  lie  down  with  this  anxiety  every 
night,  as  the  seeker  of  learning  or  wealth  does.  Alas ! 
few  feel  this  as  they  ought  to  feel  it !  But  this  is  what 
we  should  strive  to  make  men  feel.  And  we  ought  to 
sweep  away  all  doctrines  that  stand  in  the  way  of  this. 
We  should  allow  of  no  peace  ;  we  should  hear  of  no 
summary  method,  no  parcelling  out  of  the  matters  of 
religious  experience,  that  will  make  it  a  different  thing 
from  the  daily,  plain,  practical,  unwearied  doing  of 
every  thing  a  man  ought  to  do.  No  believing  of  creeds, 
no  paying  of  contributions,  no  regular  and  stated 
prayers,  no  oft-repeated  confessions,  proper  as  these  are 
in  their  place ;  no  atonement,  nor  election,  nor  special 
grace,  nor  perseverance,  true  as  they  are  when  truly 
explained,  should  save  a  man  from  the  pressure  of  this 
instant  necessity. 

I  conceive  that  the  reason  why  Calvinism  offers 
more  support  to  many  minds  is,  that  it  is  a  more  arti- 
ficial system,  and  approaches  less  nearly  to  the  simple 
truth.  It  is  too  much  a  religion  of  seasons  and  times, 
of  fixtures  and  props,  of  reliefs  and  substitutions,  of 
comforts  and  confidences.     And  I  am  persuaded  that 


CONCLUSION.  131 

the  Roman  Catholic  rehgion  would  much  better  an- 
swer the  purpose  of  supporting  and  satisfying  minds, 
in  the  state  now  supposed.  There  have  been,  not 
long  since,  some  distinguished  converts  in  Germany 
to  the  Catholic  faith.  I  could  easily  conceive  of  one 
of  them  as  saying ;  "  here  at  last  I  find  rest ;  I  find 
certainty  and  refuge  in  the  infallibility  and  absolution 
of  the  Holy  Church.  This,  too,  is  the  accumulated 
support  of  ages,  laiilt  on  the  virtues  and  sufferings  of 
fathers,  and  confessors,  and  martyrs.  How,  also,  am  I 
aflfected  with  the  real  presence  of  the  body  of  Christ  in 
the  sacrament,  with  the  guardianship  of  saints,  and 
the  interceding  tenderness  of  the  Holy  Mother  !  I 
never  was  so  impressed  with  any  religion  as  this.  I 
never  found  such  joy  and  peace  in  any.  This  is  the 
religion  for  a  siiirier  !  This  is  what  my  depraved  and 
burdened  nature  wanted !" 

'•  Yes,"  replies  the  sound  Protestant,  "  but  it  would 
not  move  me^  nor  support  nor  comfort  me.  The  im- 
pressiveness  of  a  religion  does  not  depend,  altogether, 
upon  its  truth  or  falsehood,  but  very  much  on  the  state 
of  the  mind  that  receives  it."  And  this  is  what  we  an- 
swer to  the  Calvinist.  We  say  that  Calvinism  would 
make  no  kindly  nor  renewing  impression  on  us.  And 
as  to  comfort  and  support,  it  seems  to  us  in  some  of  its 
features,  the  most  cheerless  and  desolate  of  all  systems. 

Y.  But  I  must  hasten  to  the  last  objection  that  I 
intended  to  notice.  It  is  said  that  there  is  a  fatal 
coldness  in  the  Unitarian  system,  that  there  is  no  ex- 
citement in  it,  no  reality,  no  seriousness,  no  strictness ; 
that  it  is  fitted  to  gratify  the  proud,  the  philosophic,  the 
worldly  and  the  vicious. 

I  must  again  remind  the  reader,  in  the  first  place, 
that  this  is  just  what  new  views  of  religion  may  expect, 
and  what  they  have  always  in  fact  encountered.     It 


132  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

is  no  strange  thing,  that  strangers  to  the  practical 
sense  of  our  principles,  should  not  confess  their  power. 
All  this  cry  was  raised  against  the  Reformation,  as 
loudly  as  it  is  raised  against  us. 

Nay,  it  may  be  admitted  in  the  second  place,  with- 
out any  prejudice  to  the  cause  I  maintain,  that  new 
views  in  religion  will  be  most  likely  to  attract  the 
attention  of  those,  who  are  least  prejudiced  in  favour 
of  the  old  :  that  is  to  say,  of  the  less  religious  ;  and  of 
persons,  too,  who  have  been  less  religious,  in  many 
instances,  for  the  very  reason,  that  they  could  not  bear 
the  errors  of  the  popular  faith.  Nay,  more  ;  it  may 
be  admitted  that  new  views  of  religion,  however  true, 
will  probably  do  injury  to  some.  There  are  some  most 
extraordinary  confessions  to  this  effect,  from  the  lips 
of  the  Reformers.  New  views  are  liable  to  unsettle 
the  minds  that  hastily  receive  them  ;  and  some,  that 
are  averse  to  all  religion  and  to  all  self-denial,  may 
vaguely  hope,  that  another  doctrine  would  be  more 
indulgent  to  their  vices.  Yes,  and  they  may  make  it 
so  ;  for  what  good  thing  has  not  been  abused  ?  This 
great  subject,  in  fact,  has  been  so  treated  and  taught, 
that  in  religion,  most  of  all,  men  are  apt  to  show  them- 
selves superficial  and  weak  creatures.  And  it  is  not 
strange  that  those,  who  have  dwelt  long  in  darkness, 
should  be  dazzled  and  bewildered  and  led  astray  by 
the  light,  or  that  liberty  should  be  a  dangerous  thing 
to  be  enslaved.  What  if  Christianity  had  been  judged 
by  the  state  of  the  Corinthian  Church  ? 

And  yet  Christianity  came  as  a  religion  of  power 
and  strictness,  and  so  I  maintain  that  it  still  is  found 
to  be  in  the  form  in  vrhich  we  hold  it.  If  others, 
who  are  experimentally  ignorant  of  it,  may  testify 
against  it ;  we,  who  have  felt  what  it  is,  may  be 
excused  if  we  testifv  in  its  favour.     And  I  know  that 


CONCLUSION.  133 

I  speak  the  language  of  hundreds  and  thousands,  when 
I  say  that  reUgion  to  us  is  the  one  theme  of  interest ; 
of  unspeakable,    undying   interest.     We   would   not 
exchange  the  sense  we  have  of  it,  for  thrones  and 
kingdoms.     To  take  it  away,  would  be  to  take  from 
us  our  chief  light,  blessing,  and  hope.     We  have  felt 
the  power  of  the  world  to  come,  and  no  language  can 
tell   what   that   power   is,  can  tell  the  value  of  an 
immortal  hope  and   prospect.     We   have  heard  the 
great  and  good  teacher,  and  we  feel  that  "  never  man 
spake  like  this  man."  By  him,  we  trust  that  we  have 
been  brought  nigh  to  God  ;  and  this  nearness  consum- 
mates the  infinite  good,  which  we  embrace  in  our 
religion.     On  all  this  I  might  dwell  long  and  abund- 
antly ;  but  I  will  not  trust  myself  to  say,  what  I  feel 
that  I  might  say  for  many,  lest  I  be  accused  of  "  the 
foolishness  of  boasting."     And  if  even  for  what  I  do 
say,  I  am  so  accused,  I  must  adopt  the  apostle's  justi- 
fication, and  say,  I  have  been  "  compelled."     For  how 
can  men,  who  feel  that  religion  is  the  great  resort  of 
the  mind,  and  the  living  interest,  and  the  animating 
hope,  consent  to  the  charge,  that  all  on  this  subject  is 
cold^nd  cheerless  as  death  among  them  !     We  should 
be  ungrateful  for  the  first  of  blessings,  if  we  could  be 
silent.     We  have  communed  with  religion  in  sorrow, 
and  it  has  comforted  us ;    in  joy,  and  it  has  blessed 
us  ;    in  difficulty  and  trouble,  and  it  has  guided  and 
calmed  us ;  in  temptations,  and  it  has  strengthened  us  ; 
in    conscious   guilt  and  error,  and  this  religion  has 
encouraged  and  comforted  and  forgiven  us ;  and  we 
must  testify  our  sense  to  its  value.     It  is  here  that  we 
have  treasured  up  the  joy  and  hope  of  our  being  ;  it  is 
here  that  we  have  poured  out  the  fulness  of  our  hearts  ; 
and  if  this  is  to  be  cold  and  dead,  we  ask  in  the  name 
of  sense   and  truth,  what  is  it  to  feel'/      If  this  is 
12 


134  CURSORY    OBSERVATIONS. 

philosophy,  God  give  us  more  of  this  philosophy.  Yes, 
it  is  philosophy,  divine  and  heaven-descended  ;  it  is 
truth  immortal ;  it  is  religion,  which  if  it  can  be  carried 
on  within  us,  will,  we  are  persuaded,  through  God's 
mercy,  lead  us  to  heaven. 

I  have  now  completed  the  views  which,  in  conclu- 
sion, I  intended  to  give  to  some  of  the  popular  objec- 
tions to  Unitarian  Christianity.  Let  me  w^arn  every 
man,  in  close,  to  beware  of  taking  any  light  and 
trifling  views  of  the  religion  on  which  he  founds  his 
hope.  If  any  views  that  ever  enter  our  minds  tend  to 
slacken  the  obligations  of  virtue,  or  to  let  down  the 
claims  of  piety,  let  us  discard  those  views  at  once  and 
for  ever.  Let  us  take  a  viper  to  our  bosom  sooner  than 
lay  a  flattering  unction  to  the  soul,  that  will  make  it 
easier  in  sin.  Sin  is  the  sting  of  death,  and  it  will  kill 
and  destroy  all  that  is  dear  and  precious  to  an  immor- 
tal creature.  Religion  only  is  life  and  peace  ;  and  it 
is  also  zeal,  and  fervour,  and  joy,  and  hope,  and  watch- 
fulness, and  strictness,  and  self-denial,  and  patience 
unto  the  end. 


DISCOURSES  AND  REVIEWS. 


THE  ANALOGY  OF  RELIGION  WITH  OTHER 
SUBJECTS  CONSIDERED. 


I  speak  as  to  wise  men  :  judge  ye  what  I  say. — 1  Cor.  x.  15. 

It  was  an  observation  of  an  eminent  expounder  of 
the  science  of  jurisprudence,*  that  "  the  reason  of  the 
law  is  the  Ufe  of  the  law  ;  for  though  a  man,"  says  he, 
"  can  tell  the  law,  yet  if  he  know  not  the  reason  thereof, 
he  shall  soon  forget  his  superficial  knowledge.  But 
when  he  findeth  the  right  reason  of  the  law,  and  so 
bringeth  it  to  his  natural  reason  that  he  comprehend- 
eth  it  as  his  own,  this  will  not  only  serve  him  for  the 
understanding  of  that  particular  case,  but  of  many 
others." 

This  comprehensive  reason  is  as  necessary  in  reli- 
gion, as  in  the  law  ;  which,  rightly  considered,  indeed, 
is  but  a  part  of  the  science  of  religion  or  rectitude. 
The  great  danger  to  the  mind,  indeed,  in  pursuing 
every  science,  is  that  of  being  narrow  and  technical, 
and  so  of  losing  truth,  while  it  is  gaining  knowledge. 
For,  truth  is  universal  ;  it  is  the  conclusion  derived 
from  those  facts,  the  possession  of  which  we  call 
knowledge.     Truth,  I  say,  is  universal ;  and  religious 

*  Lord  Littleton. 

12* 


138  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

truth  possesses  this  character  as  much  as  any  other. 
What  is  true  in  reUgion,  is  true  in  everything  else  to 
which  such  truth  is  capable  of  being  applied  ;  true  in 
the  law,  true  in  moral  philosophy,  true  in  the  prudence 
of  life,  true  in  all  human  action. 

From  this  position  results  the  use  of  an  instrument 
for  religious  investigation,  to  which  I  wish  to  invite 
your  attention.  The  instrument  I  refer  to  is  compa- 
rison. I  invite  you  to  compare  religion  with  other 
things,  to  which  it  is  analogous.  Fairly  to  put  this 
instrument  into  your  hands,  to  give  some  examples  of 
its  use  and  application,  will  require  a  course  of  three 
or  four  lectures,  which  I  shall  give  on  Sunday  even- 
ings. 

Let  it  not  be  supposed  that  there  is  anything  new  in 
this  mode  of  investigation.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  so 
familiar,  that  it  enters  more  or  less  into  almost  every 
religious  discourse.  It  is  justified  by  the  practice  of 
all  sorts  of  religious  and  moral  teachers.  It  is  the  only 
instrument  used  in  that  great  work  of  Bishop  Butler, 
entitled  his  Analogy.  All  I  wish  to  do  is,  for  a  little 
time,  to  fix  attention  upon  it. 

It  is  not  pretended  that  this  instrument  is  infallible. 
The  degree  of  proof,  to  be  gathered  from  any  compari- 
son, depends  on  the  closeness  of  the  analogy.  To  this 
point,  the  closeness  of  the  analogy,  the  main  point  in 
this  kind  of  inquiry,  I  shall  give  the  most  discrimin- 
ating attention  that  I  am  capable  of,  and  shall  wish 
my  hearers  constantly  to  judge,  as  wise  men,  what  I 
say.  The  instrument,  I  confess,  is  liable  to  abuse. 
To  give  an  instance  of  this :  I  have  heard  preachers 
liken  the  case  of  the  unconverted  sinner  to  that  of  a 
man  in  a  burning  house,  or  in  a  pestilence,  or  in  peril 
of  shipwreck,  and  they  have  advocated  and  defended 
the  utmost  extravagance  of  spiritual  fear  and  eflfbrt,  on 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  139 

the  ground  that  the  sinner  is  instill  greater  danger. 
Here  is  comparison,  indeed,  but  no  analogy.  There  is 
no  analogy,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  precise  point  on  which 
the  argument  depends.  There  is  analogy,  indeed,  in 
the  danger,  but  not  in  the  nature  of  the  danger.  In 
a  burning  house,  or  in  a  shipwreck,  the  peril  is  instant ; 
all  that  can  be  done  for  escape,  must  be  done  in  an 
hour  or  a  moment ;  and  men  arejustified  in  acting  almost 
like  distracted  men  at  such  a  moment.  But  spiritual 
danger  is  of  a  different  character ;  it  is  not  all  accu- 
mulated upon  a  given  instant ;  it  is  not  one  stupendous 
crisis  in  a  man's  life,  but  it  spreads  itself  over  his  whole 
being.  It  is  not,  like  the  whelming  wave,  or  the 
already  scorching  fire,  to  bring  fright  and  agony  into 
the  mind ;  on  the  contrary,  the  special  characteristics 
of  spiritual  fear  should  be  reflection,  calmness,  and 
intense  thoughtfulness.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  to  be  the 
action  of  the  spiritual,  and  not  of  the  animal  nature. 
You  perceive,  therefore,  that  the  instrument  I  am 
about  to  recommend  to  you,  is  to  be  used  with  great 
caution,  with  a  wise  discretion.  In  the  use  of  it,  I 
shall  constantly  hold  myself  amenable  to  that  judg- 
ment of  good  sense,  to  which  the  apostle  himself,  in 
my  text,  appealed.  Bishop  Butler,  in  the  great  work 
before  alluded  to,  limited  the  uses  of  analogy  entirely 
to  the  purpose  of  defence.  He  maintained  and  showed, 
that  certain  facts  in  nature  and  in  life  were  analogous 
to  certain  doctrines  in  the  Bible  ;  and  his  argument 
was,  not  that  the  existence  of  the  facts  proved  the 
truth  of  the  doctrines,  but  simply  that  they  took  away 
all  fair  and  philosophical  objection  from  those  doc- 
trines. Thus,  if  the  consequences  of  a  single  sin  often 
follow  a  man  through  life,  if  this  is  actually  a  part  of 
God's  administration  of  the  affairs  of  this  world,  then 
there  is  no  objection  to  that  doctrine  of  our  Scriptures, 


140  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

which  declares  that  consequences  of  a  hfe  of  sin  shall 
follow  the  offender  into  another  state.  With  Bishop 
Butler's  views  of  what  the  doctrines  of  revelation  are, 
I  have  nothing  here  to  do.  I  have  only  to  say,  that  I 
am  willing  to  be  governed  by  a  similar  caution.  I 
wish  to  present  to  you  certain  rational  views  of  reli- 
gion, as  they  appear  to  me,  and  these  mainly  of  prac- 
tical religion  ;  and  against  the  common  allegations  of 
insufficiency,  shallowness,  or  untruth,  in  these  views, 
I  wish  to  appeal  to  what  men  allow  to  be  sound  and 
satisfactory  and  thorough,  in  other  departments  of 
human  action  and  feeling. 

There  is,  however,  one  objection  to  this  method  of 
inquiry  itself,  which  I  must  consider  before  I  enter 
upon  it.  It  is  said  that  religion  is  God's  work  in  the 
soul,  a  pecuhar,  if  not  a  supernatural  work ;  and  hence 
it  is  inferred  that  rehgion  is  not  to  be  judged  of,  on 
principles  common  to  it  with  other  subjects  and  quali- 
ties. I  answer  that  the  conclusion  does  not  follow 
from  the  premises.  I  might  deny  the  premises  per- 
haps, in  the  sense  in  which  they  are  put ;  but  for  the 
purposes  of  the  proposed  inquiry  I  need  not  deny  them. 
I  may  allow  that  religion  is  the  special  work  of  God  in 
the  soul,  which  it  is  in  a  certain  sense,  and  yet  I  may 
fairly  maintain  that  it  is  to  be  judged  of  like  other 
principles  in  the  soul.  For  all  Christians,  of  a  sound 
and  reasonable  mind,  are  now  accustomed  to  admit, 
that  God's  work  in  the  soul  does  not  violate  the  laws 
of  the  soul ;  that  the  influence  of  the  Infinite  Spirit, 
whatever  it  be,  is  perfectly  compatible  with  the  moral 
constitution  of  the  being  influenced.  But  ho\v  is  man 
influenced  in  other  things  ?  The  answer  is,  by  con- 
siderations, by  reasons  and  motives,  by  fears  and  hopes. 
So  is  he  influenced  in  religion.  All  moral  influence, 
whether  derived  from  Scripture,  from  preaching,  from 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  141 

reflection,  or  from  conscience,  is  one  great  and  per- 
fectly rational  appeal  to  man's  moral  nature  ;  and  the 
result  is  to  be  judged  of  accordingly.  What  religion 
is  true ;  and  what  is  true  in  the  views  presented  of  the 
received  rehgion  ;  what  are  proper  and  just  exhibitions 
of  it ;  what  are  the  due  and  right  means  and  methods 
of  cultivating  it ;  and  what  are  its  claims  upon  us : 
all  these  matters  are  to  be  considered,  as  we  consider 
other  obligations,  truths,  developments  of  character 
and  methods  of  improvement.  It  is  no  argument  for 
unreasonableness,  for  impropriety  of  conduct  or  man- 
ners, for  extravagance,  fanaticism  or  folly,  that  the 
subject  is  religion,  or  that  religion  is  the  work  of  God 
in  the  soul.  This,  on  the  contrary,  is  the  strongest  of 
reasons  for  insisting  that  rehgion  should  be  perfectly 
and  profoundly  sober,  rational  and  wise.  That  which 
comes  from  the  fountain  of  reason,  and  as  its  gift  to  a 
rational  nature,  will  not,  we  may  be  sure,  contradict 
the  laws  of  that  reason  and  that  nature. 

This  is  a  point  to  be  insisted  on,  and  the  proposed 
disG^ission  may  have  special  advantages  in  this  view. 
Indeed,  I  know  of  no  other  way  in  which  the  worst 
practical  errors  are  to  be  removed  from  the  Church,  but 
by  the  application  of  the  test  in  question  ;  by  canying 
religion  entirely  out  from  the  walls  of  conventicles,  and 
the  pale  of  technical  theology,  and  from  all  the  narrow 
maxims  of  peculiar  religious  coteries  and  sects,  into 
the  broad  field  of  common  sense  and  sound  judgment. 
The  advocates,  whether  of  a  speculative  system  or  of 
a  practical  economy  in  religion,  can  never  tell  how  it 
looks,  till  they  see  it  in  this  open  light,  and  in  its  rela- 
tion to  the  whole  surrounding  world  of  objects.  Kept 
within  a  certain  circle  and  never  looking  beyond  it, 
and  holding  that  things  may  be  true  in  that  circle, 
which  are  true  nowhere  else,  men  may  reason  in  that 


142  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

circle,  and  reason  strongly,  and  reason  for  ever,  and 
never  advance  one  step  towards  broad,  generous,  uni- 
versal truth.     Thus  it  has  always  been,  that  mistake, 
fanaticism,  practical  error  in  religious  matters,  have 
rested  their  claims  on  the  peculiar,  unusual,  superna- 
tural character  of  the  subject.     Religious  extravagance 
of  every  sort  has  alwaj^s  had  its  strong  hold,  within 
barriers  that  have  shut  out  the  common  judgment  and 
sense  of  the  world.     Nay,  I  may  add,  since  I  have 
spoken  of  comparing  religion  with  other  qualities  of 
the  mind,  that  there  are  many  by  whom  it  is  yet  to  be 
learnt,  that  religion  is  a  quality  of  the  mind.     They 
are  apt  to  consider  it  as  a  gift  and  an  influence,  rather 
than  as  a  quality,  principle  and  part  of  the  soul.    They 
consider  it  as  something  superinduced,  bestow^ed  upon 
human  nature,  rather  than  as  the  great  and  just  result 
of  that  nature.     They  do  not  feel  as  if  it  were  some- 
thing dear  to  that  nature ;  something  not  forced  upon 
its  reluctant  acceptance,  not  sustained  in  its  rebellious 
bosom,  but  cherished  within  it,  craved  by  it,  welcome 
and  precious  to  all  its  strongest  affections  and  noblest 
faculties.     So  the  mani/,  I  say,  are  not  accustomed  to 
regard  it.     They  do  not  see  it  as  the  great  develop- 
ment of  the  soul :  but  they  see  it  as  a  communication. 
And  seeing  it  as  a  communication,  as  coming,  in  some 
supernatural  manner,  from  God,  they  are  apt  to  set  it 
apart  from  other  qualities  and  pursuits.     They  do  not 
deal  freely  with  it.     If  they  do  not  feel  as  if  it  were 
something  above  reason,  they,  at  least,  feel  as  if  it 
were  something  with  which  reason  may  not  strongly 
and  fearlessly  grapple ;  as  if  it  were  too  ethereal  an 
essence  for  the  plain  dealing  of  common  sense.     To 
this  plain  dealing,  however,  it  must  be  brought.      To 
this  we  are  justified  in  bringing  it,  by  the  clearest  prin- 
ciples of  all  rational  theology ;  for  all  such  theology 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  143 

admits,  that  God  does  no  violence  to  the  laws  of 
human  nature,  when  he  works  within  it  both  to  will 
and  to  do  according  to  his  good  pleasure.  And  I  say 
and  repeat,  that  to  this  test  of  sober  and  judicious 
comparison,  religion  must  come,  if  it  is  ever  to  be  dis- 
abused of  the  errors  that  have  burthened  and  enslaved 
it.  How,  otherwise,  could  you  proceed,  if  you  had  to 
deal,  for  instance,  with  the  absurdities  of  Hindoo 
superstition  ?  You  might  try  to  approach  it  in  other 
ways ;  as,  for  instance,  with  solemn  tones  and  solemn 
asseverations  ;  but  you  would  find,  at  length,  that  you 
could  do  nothing  else  with  it,  but  to  bring  it  into  com- 
parison with  other  principles  and  manifestations  of 
human  nature  and  human  Hfe.  You  would  say,  "  this 
penance  of  yours,  this  hanging  yourself  from  a  tree, 
in  a  burning  sun,  to  die,  is  absurd,  useless,  uncalled 
for  by  the  Deity.  Who  ever  thought  of  seeking  hap- 
piness or  securing  the  friendship  of  any  other  being,  in 
this  way  ?"  And  if  he  were  to  answer  that  religion  is 
unlike  every  other  principle  in  its  exactions,  and  that 
Godis  not  to  be  pleased  as  other  beings  are,  you  would 
undertake  to  show  him,  tliat  the  principle  of  goodness 
is  everywhere  the  same ;  that  God,  whose  nature  is 
goodness,  cannot  be  pleased  with  pain  for  its  own  sake ; 
that  he  desires  no  sacrifice  which  can  effect  no  good 
end.  That  is  to  say,  you  would  endeavour  to  reason 
with  the  superstitious  devotee,  upon  general  principles  : 
upon  principles  applicable  alike  to  rehgion  and  to  every 
other  analogous  subject. 

This  is  what  I  shall  now  attempt  to  do  with  religion, 
by  proceeding  to  some  particular  instances.  The 
instances,  which  I  shall  take  up  in  the  remainder  of 
this  discourse,  belong  to  the  department  of  first  prin- 
ciples ;  and  in  them  I  shall  chiefly  address  the  religious 
skeptic. 


144  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

I.  In  the  first  place,  let  us  look  at  the  very  elements 
of  religion.  By  some  it  is  denied,  that  there  are  any 
such  elements.  They  say  that  religion  is  altogether 
a  matter  of  institution  and  appointment.  They  say 
that  it  has  been  imposed  upon  mankind  by  priests  and 
by  governments  ;  and  but  for  these  external  influences, 
they  say,  that  there  never  would  have  been  such  a 
thing  as  religion  in  the  world.  Let  us  look  at  these 
assumptions  in  the  light  of  a  comprehensive  philoso- 
phy. 

Now,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  the  basis  of  every 
other  science  and  subject  in  the  world  is  laid  in  certain 
indisputable  first  principles.  In  other  words,  there  are 
certain  undeniable  facts,  either  in  nature  or  in  the 
mind,  on  which,  as  a  foundation,  every  system  of  truth 
is  built  up.  Thtis  in  the  natural  sciences,  in  mine- 
ralogy, in  chemistry,  and  botany  and  astronomy,  there 
are  certain  facts  in  nature,  which  are  received  as  the 
basis.  These  facts  are  generalized  into  laws,  and 
these  laws  are  formed  into  systems.  Newton  saAV  the 
apple  fall,  and  from  this  fact  he  proceeded,  till  he  had 
established  the  laws  of  planetary  motion,  and  the 
sublime  system  of  the  universe.  So  in  the  abstract 
science  of  geometry,  certain  unquestionable  truths  or 
axioms  are  laid  down ;  and  so  in  the  science  of  the 
mind,  certain  irresistible  emotions  and  acts  of  the  mind 
are  taken,  as  the  ground  of  each  of  these  departments 
of  philosophy.  Even  the  department  of  taste  has  its 
undeniable  first  truths.  Now,  the  science  or  subject 
of  religion  has,  in  the  same  way,  its  indisputable  first 
truths.  In  the  mind,  there  are  certain  religious  facts,  as 
clearly  manifested  as  any  metaphysical  facts,  or  any 
emotions  of  taste.  But  how  do  we  come  to  the  know- 
ledge of  these  latter  classes  of  facts  ?  I  answer,  by 
experience,  and  by  nothing  else.    And  how  do  we  come 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  l45 

to  the  knowledge  of  the  reUgious  facts  in  the  mind  ? 
I  answer,  by  the  same  means,  and  no  other. 

What  then  is  the  conclusion  ?  Why,  that  religion 
has  a  foundation  in  our  nature  as  truly  as  mental 
philosophy.  A  man  may  deny  this  ;  he  may  resort  to 
his  presumptuous  assertions,  and  say,  that  religion  is 
nothing  but  an  imposition,  a  dogma  and  a  fancy.  But 
he  might  just  as  well  assert  that  reason  is  nothing  but 
an  imposition,  and  a  dogma  and  a  fancy.  He  may 
point  to  the  diversities  of  religion,  and  tell  us  that  every- 
thing is  denied  by  one  party  or  another,  and  thence 
infer  that  nothing  can  be  true.  But  he  might  as  well 
draw  the  same  inference  from  the  diversified  forms,  in 
which  the  principle  of  reason  has  presented  itself, 
whether  in  the  absurd  conduct  of  life,  or  in  the  strange 
history  of  opinions. 

What  then,  I  repeat,  is  the  conclusion  ?  It  is  this. 
Religion  is  true ;  I  do  not  say  that  every  rehgion  is 
true.  But  I  say  that  religion  in  general,  is  a  true 
principle  of  human  nature.  I  say,  that  there  is  a  real 
science  of  religion,  a  deep-founded  and  im questionable 
philosophy  of  religion,  as  truly  as  there  is  any  other 
science  or  philosophy  in  the  world.  If  experience  is 
the  test  of  truth,  religion  is  true.  If  universality  is 
the  test  of  truth,  religion  is  true.  There  never  was  a 
nation  nor  tribe  found  on  earth,  in  which  the  feelings 
of  conscience  and  of  adoration  were  not  found.  And 
he,  who  is  ever,  at  any  moment,  shaken  in  his  primary 
religious  convictions  by  the  bold  assaults  of  skepticism, 
may  justly  rally,  and  fairly  and  fearlessly  say  to  his 
assailant,  if  any  thing  in  the  world  is  true,  religion  is 
true. 

n.  So  then  do  we  lay  the  foundations  of  the  religious 
principle  ;  and  now  let  us  proceed  to  consider,  in  the 
light  proposed,  the  evidences  of  that  rehgion,  which  we 
13 


146  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

receive  as  bearing  the  special   sanction  of  Heaven. 
And  the  observation  to  be  made  is,  that  the  evidences 
of  Christianity  are  to  be  weighed,  as  other  evidences 
are  weighed.     And  they  are,  in  fact,  just  such  proofs 
as  may  be  rendered  famihar  to  us,  by  what  passes  in 
every  court  of  justice.     In  the  first  place,  there  are  the 
Christian  witnesses ;  and  such  witnesses,  indeed,  as 
were  never  produced  in  any  other  cause  ;  men  not  only 
of  unimpeachable  character,  of  great  and  acknowledged 
vii'tue,  but  who  have  given  in  their  writings  the  most 
extraordinary  example  of  the  absence  of  all  enthusiasm 
that  the  world  can  show ;  men,  I  say,  and  such  men, 
who  spent  laborious  and  painful  lives,    and  suffered 
bloody  deaths,  in  attestation,  not  of  some  fancy  or 
imagination  in  their  own  minds,  not  of  their  belief  that 
they  were  inspired  merely,  but  in  attestation  of  certain 
manifest  and  miraculous  facts.     And  then  in  the  com- 
parison of  their  testimonies,   we  have  the  strongest 
corroboration  of  their  honesty  and  truth.     On  the  one 
hand,  there  are  a  few  slight  discrepancies  between  them, 
just  sufficient  to  show  that  there  could  have  been  no 
collusion ;    and    on  the   other  hand,  numerous   and 
evidently  undesigned  coincidences,  both  with  them- 
selves and  with  contemporary  profane  writers,  which 
put  the  strongest  stamp  of  verisimilitude  upon  their 
narrations.     And  then,  again,  the  moral  character  of 
these  productions  is  such  as  to  set  their  authors  above 
all  suspicion  of  disingenuity ;  such  as  to  show  that 
dishonest  and  bad  men  could  not  have  given  birth  to 
them ;  and  such,  in  fact,  as  to  constitute  a  strong^ 
independent  argument  for  their  divine  origin.     But  I 
confine  myself  now  to  this  one  branch  of  the  evidence, 
the  testimony ;  and  I  say  that  if  such  a  weight  of 
testimony  were  produced  in  a  court  of  justice,  all  the 
records  of  judicial  proceedings  could  show  nothing 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  147 

stronger,  or  more  satisfactory.  I  say  that  men  are 
every  day  deciding  and  acting  upon  a  tythe  of  the 
evidence  that  is  offered  to  support  the  Christian  rehgion. 
What  if  there  is  not  anything  amounting  to  the  force 
of  mathematical  demonstration  ?  The  case  does  not 
admit  it ;  and  in  the  ordinary  affairs  of  Hfe,  men  do 
not  demand  it.  Why  shall  they  not,  in  religion,  as  in 
other  things,  act  upon  the  evidence  they  have  ?  Sup- 
pose that  it  is  less  clear  to  some  than  to  others. 
Suppose,  that  it  amounts  with  them  only  to  a  strong 
probability.  Suppose  that  they  have  doubts.  Do 
doubts  paralyze  them  in  other  cases  ?  Does  not  a  man 
make  all  sorts  of  sacrifices,  become  an  exile,  tread 
dangerous  coasts,  breathe  tainted  climes,  for  a  distant 
and  uncertain  fortune  ?  But  has  any  body  told  him 
that  the  wealth  he  seeks  waits  for  him  ?  Has  any 
miracle  been  wrought  before  his  eyes?  Has  God 
assured  him,  beyond  any  doubt,  of  the  fruition  of  his 
hopee  ?  Yet  he  ventures  much,  ventures  all,  for  the 
chance  of  worldly  fortune  :  can  he  venture  nothing  for 
the  hope  of  heaven  ?  Let  him  walk  in  the  way  of  the 
Christian  precepts.  That  cannot  harm  him,  whether 
there  be  a  future  life  or  not.  Let  his  conduct  follow 
the  weight  of  evidence.  No  reasonable  being  can 
gainsay  or  condemn  him,  for  being  governed  by  the 
strongest  probability.  This  is  the  only  safe  or  wise 
course.  "Let  him  do  the  will  of  God,  and  he  shall 
know  of  the  doctrine  whether  it  be  from  God."  If  he 
will  not  do  this,  if  he  is  averse  to  the  strictness  of 
Christian  virtue,  he  has  cause  enough  to  suspect  the 
source  of  his  skepticism.  Nay,  more ;  we  have  a  right, 
in  accordance  with  what  is  fairly  claimed  on  other 
subjects,  to  demand  of  him,  who  would  investigate  the 
Christian  evidences,  a  religious  spirit,  and  a  virtuous 
temper.     He  who  should  undertake  to  pronounce  upon 


148  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

a  great  work  of  genius,  a  poem  or  a  painting,  without 
any  cultivation  or  congeniality  of  taste,  would  be  looked 
upon  as  an  unqualified  and  presumptuous  judge.  By 
the  same  rule,  he  who  would  fairly  examine  the  evi- 
dences of  a  pure  system  of  religion,  must,  in  reason, 
be  a  good  and  devout  man  ;  else  his  investigation  is 
nothing  worth.  Have  infidels  often  considered  this  ? 
Have  they  generally  approached  the  Christian  evi- 
dences in  this  spirit? 

But  let  us  take  some  notice,  in  the  third  place,  and 
finally,  of  the  Christian  records.  I  say,  then,  that  our 
Christian  books  are  to  he  regarded,  in  some  impor- 
tant respects,  as  other  books  are.  Men,  for  instance, 
are  not  to  take  up  the  Bible  and  read  it,  as  if  they  ex- 
pected it  to  do  them  good,  or  give  them  light,  in  any 
unusual  or  unknown  way.  They  are  not  to  expect 
any  illumination  in  perusing  the  Scriptures,  other  than 
that  of  reason  and  piety.  Some  other  may  be  given 
in  extraordinary  cases,  but  they  are  not  to  require 
miracles.  They  are  not  to  expect  to  understand  this 
book  because  it  is  the  Bible,  in  any  other  way,  or  upon 
any  other  principles  of  interpretation,  than  they  would 
use  to  gather  the  meaning  of  any  ancient  book.  And 
as  many  portions  of  the  Bible,  the  speculative  and 
controversial  parts  particularly,  are  clothed  in  the 
polemic  phraseology  of  an  ancient  age,  and  have 
taken  their  hue  and  form  from  ancient  disputes,  states 
of  mind,  customs  of  society,  &c. ;  as  all  this  is  true  of 
some  portions  of  Scripture,  the  unlearned  reader  can- 
not, without  more  information  than  most  persons  pos- 
sess, reasonably  expect  to  understand  those  parts  at  all. 
Suppose  that  a  plain  reader,  totally  unacquainted  with 
the  systems  of  Plato  or  Aristotle,  or  with  the  Mani- 
chean  philosophy,  should,  in  perusing  an  ancient  book, 
meet  with  a  passage  crowded  with  the  terms  and  modes 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  149 

of  thought  borrowed  from  either  of  these  systems.  Can 
you  doubt,  that  with  the  aid  of  any  common  sense  he 
would  at  once  say,  "  I  do  not  understand  this  ?"  Would 
he  not  justly  conclude  that  he  must  read  other  books, 
and  make  himself  more  acquainted  with  the  specula- 
tions of  that  ancient  period,  before  he  could  understand 
the  passage  which  had  fallen  under  his  notice? 

So  he  would  judge  of  ancient  profane  writings,  and 
so  he  ought  to  judge  of  ancient  sacred  writings.  The 
wisdom  that  speaks  in  the  two  cases  is  different;  but 
the  method  of  interpreting  that  wisdom  is  the  same  in 
both.  Bat  so  most  Christian  readers  do  not  judge. 
They  read  the  Bible,  as  if  it  were  a  modern  book. 
Or,  they  feel  as  if  it  would  dishonour  the  Bible,  to 
suppose  that  any  part  of  it  were  necessarily  obscure  or 
unintelligible  to  the  unlearned  reader.  They  look  upon 
the  Scriptures,  as  a  direct  revelation,  or  as  the  imme- 
diate and  express  word  of  God  himself,  rather  than  as 
a  series  of  messages  declaring,  after  the  manner  of  the 
times,  the  will  of  God.  And  entertaining  the  former 
of  these  impressions,  they  rightly  argue  that  a  book, 
purporting  to  be  a  revelation  to  mankind,  unless  all 
men  can  readily  understand  it,  is  no  revelation.  But 
there  can  be  no  doubt,  I  presume,  that  this  impression 
is  a  mistaken  one.  The  sacred  writers  were  commis- 
sioned to  declare  certain  truths ;  and  they  were  left  to 
declare  them  after  their  own  manner,  and  the  manner 
of  the  age ;  and  it  is  no  more  easy  to  understand  the 
Bible,  than  it  is  to  understand  ani/  ancient  book. 
This  conclusion  must  be  admitted,  whatever  may  be 
thought  of  the  reasoning.  Explain  the  doctrine  of  in- 
spiration as  we  may,  it  is  an  unquestionable  truth,  and 
every  enlightened  student  of  the  Bible  must  know  it, 
that  there  are  considerable  portions  of  it,  which  cannot 
be  understood  without  much  study,  and  without,  to  say 
13* 


100;  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

the  least,  some  learning,  which  the  body  of  the  people 
do  not  possess.  Every  sensible  man,  who  has  really 
studied  his  Bible,  must  know  that  this  is  the  case  with 
considerable  portions  of  the  Prophecies  and  Epistles. 
The  people  at  large  are  reading  these  continually,  and 
think  to  derive  benefit  from  them,  and  do,  no  doubt, 
afiix  to  them  some  vague  meaning ;  but  they  do  not 
and  cannot  understand  them.  They  comprehend  what 
is  practical  for  the  most  part,  and  all  that  is  essential ; 
but  much  of  what  is  speculative  and  controversial,  I 
repeat  it,  with  their  present  knowledge,  they  do  not 
and  cannot  understand. 

This  may  be  a  hard  saying  to  many ;  but  I  believe 
it  ought  not,  being  unquestionably  true,  to  be  with- 
holden.  It  may  be  an  unpopular  doctrine,  but  that 
circumstance,  I  hope,  does  not  prove  it  unimportant. 
There  certainly  is  a  mistake  on  this  subject;  and  the 
greatness  of  the  error  is  but  the  greater  reason  for 
correcting  it.  Besides,  the  error  is  far  from  being 
harmless.  This  constant  reading  of  what  is  not  well 
comprehended;  this  attempt  to  grasp  ideas  which  are 
perpetually  escaping  through  ancient  and  unintelligible 
modes  of  thought  and  phraseology;  this  formal  and 
forced  perusal  of  obscure  chapters  with  a  sort  of 
demure  reverence,  tends  to  throw  dulness,  doubt  and 
obscurity  over  all  our  conceptions  of  religion.  The 
Bible,  too,  instead  of  being  a  bond  of  common  faith  and 
fellowship  to  Christians,  is  made  an  armory  for  polemics. 
And  there  are  some  controversies  among  the  body  of 
Christians,  which  can  never  be  intelligently  and  pro- 
perly settled,  till  they  qualify  themselves  in  a  better 
manner  to  understand  the  Scriptures.  And  yet  multi- 
tudes of  men  and  women  are  confidently  deciding 
controversies  on  the  most  difficult  questions  of  philo- 
logy and  interpretation,  who  never  read — not  Hebrew 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  151 

nor  Greek — but  who  never  read  a  book  on  criticism. 


who  never  read  a  book  on  ancient  customs,  who  never 
read  a  book  on  the  circumstances  of  the  primitive  age, 
on  the  difficulties  and  disputes  prevaiUng,  on  the  Jew- 
ish prejudices  or  the  Gentile  systems  of  philosophy: 
and  if  I  were  asked  what  I  would  give  for  the  critical 
judgment  of  these  men  and  women,  I  answer  nothing 
—  nothing  at  all.  I  derogate  nothing  from  their 
general  intelligence.  And  their  judgment  may  be 
good,  even  on  the  point  in  question,  as  far  as  their 
common  sense  will  carry  them ;  and  upon  the  general 
strain  of  the  Scriptures,  they  may  judge  well,  and 
may  come,  on  the  tvhole,  to  a  right  conclusion.  But 
upon  deep  questions  of  criticism,  they  ought  not  to 
pretend  to  judge.  I  give  that  credit  to  the  modesty  of 
many  among  us,  as  to  presume  that  they  do  not  un- 
dertake to  decide  upon  matters  of  this  sort;  and  to 
those  who  have  not  this  modesty,  it  may  be  fairly 
recommended  as  the  first  step  of  a  good  and  sound 
judgment. 

I  would  particularly  guard  what  I  have  said  on  this 
subject  from  injurious  misapprehensions.  I  certainly 
do  not  discourage  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures.  I 
only  urge  the  needful  preparation  for  it  in  regard 
to  those  parts  which  are  hard  to  be  understood.  I  do 
not  say  that  unlearned  Christians  cannot  understand 
their  religion  ;  for  their  religion,  in  substance,  is  con- 
tained in  passages  that  are  level  to  the  humblest  ap- 
prehension. I  do  not  disparage  the  Bible.  Its  value 
consists  in  the  body  of  its  undisputed  truths  and  reve- 
lations. Besides,  be  the  case  as  it  may,  it  can  be  no 
disparagement  of  the  sacred  volume  to  state  ivhat  it  is. 
And  that  it  does  require  study,  and  learning,  to  under- 
stand portions  of  it ;  what  do  all  the  labours  of  learned 
men,  what  do  innumerable  volumes  of  commentaries, 


152  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION 

and  whole  libraries  of  sacred  criticism  show,  if  they 
do  not  show  this  ?  Why  all  these  studies,  let  us  ask, 
if  unlearned  men  can  understand  the  difficult  and 
doubtful  passages  of  their  Bibles  ? 

The  truth  is,  in  my  judgment,  that  the  body  of  man- 
kind never  ought  to  have  been  disturbed  with  those 
theological  disquisitions  which  involve  or  require  a 
deep  knowledge  of  criticism,  any  more  than  they  are 
with  the  subtilties  of  the  law,  or  with  the  abstruse 
speculations  of  philosophy,  the  disputes  of  anatomists, 
metaphysicians  and  men  of  science.  General  readers, 
not  to  say  those  who  read  not  at  all,  are  just  as  un- 
able to  understand  one  as  the  other.  There  are  ques- 
tions in  religion,  undoubtedly,  which  are  proper  for  the 
general  mass  of  readers.  And  there  are  points,  doubt- 
less, connected  with  every  question,  which  are  suitable 
for  popular  discussion.  There  must  be  discussion  ;  and 
since  men  cannot  agree,  there  must  be  dispute.  Let 
there  be  controversy  then  ;  and  let  it  range  from  the 
highest  to  the  lowest  subjects.  All  I  would  contend 
for  is,  that  those  controversies,  which  are  addressed 
to  the  body  of  the  people,  be  such  as  the  people  are 
prepared  to  understand  ;  and  that  more  curious  ques- 
tions be  confined  in  religion,  as  in  other  things,  to  the 
learned.  This  reasonable  discrimination  would  have 
cut  off  many  disputes  which,  among  the  mass  of  the 
people,  are  perfectly  useless,  and  might  have  saved  us 
from  some  of  our  unhappy  dissensions. 

In  fine,  and  to  sum  up  my  observations,  let  Religion 
— I  do  not  say  now  as  a  matter  of  experience  and 
practice — but  let  Religion,  in  its  words,  its  subjects, 
and  its  controversies,  be  treated  as  other  things  are ; 
as  the  Law,  Medicine,  or  any  of  the  Sciences.  Let 
what  is  practical,  what  is  easily  understood,  what  the 
simple  and  sound  judgment  of  a  man  can  compass, 


WITH    OTHER    SUBJECTS.  153 

be  commended  in  religion,  as  in  science,  to  all  who 
can  and  will  read  it.  Let  what  is  abstruse,  what  is 
hard  to  be  understood,  what  belongs  to  the  department 
of  profound  criticism,  be  left  for  those  who  have  op- 
portunity, time  and  learning  for  it.  Let  others  read 
their  writings  as  much  as  they  please;  but  let  them 
not  judge  till  they  read ;  let  not  their  confidence  out- 
run their  knowledge.  I  think  this  is  safe  advice.  I 
cannot  conceive  of  any  possible  harm  it  can  do.  I  be- 
lieve it  would  do  much  good.  I  believe  that  it  would 
tend  to  the  promotion  of  a  practical  and  affectionate 
piety  among  us  ;  and  I  think,  moreover,  that  it  would 
do  this  special  good :  it  would  lead  men  to  rest  their 
religious  hopes  and  fears,  not  on  matters  of  doubtful 
disputation,  but  on  those  essential,  moral,  plain,  prac- 
tical grounds,  which  are  the  great  foundations  of  piety 
and  virtue. 

I  Jiave  now  presented  in  a  single  light,  the  light  of 
analogy,  the  first  principles  of  religion,  and  the  evi- 
dences and  records  of  that  particular  dispensation  of 
religion,  which,  as  Christians,  we  have  embraced.  In 
my  next  lecture,  I  shall  proceed  to  examine,  in  the 
same  way,  what  is  usually  considered  as  the  begin- 
ning of  religion,  or  rather  of  religious  character,  in 
the  human  mind  ;  in  other  words,  the  doctrine  of 
conversion. 


II. 


ON      CONVERSION. 

Except  a  man  he  horn  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God, 

John  iii.  3. 

It  will  help  us  to  understand  the  subject  of  Con- 
version, and  will  prepare  us  to  pursue  the  analogy- 
proposed  in  this  series  of  Discourses,  to  take  a  brief 
historical  view  of  that  language,  by  which,  among 
theologians,  the  doctrine  has  been  most  commonly- 
expressed  :  I  mean  that  language  which  is  founded  on 
the  figure  of  a  new  birth.  Three  views  are  to  be  taken 
of  it :  first,  of  its  signification  among  the  Jews ;  sec- 
ondly, of  its  use  among  the  early  Christian  teachers ; 
and  thirdly,  of  its  application  to  modern  Christian 
communities.  And  corresponding  to  this  distinction, 
there  are  three  kinds  of  conversion  to  be  considered ; 
the  Jewish,  the  ancient  Christian  conversion,  and  that 
which  is  to  be  urged  among  men,  already  Christian  in 
their  education  and  general  belief 

Let  me  observe,  in  passing,  that  the  phrases,  "  born 
again,"  "  new-creation,"  (fee,  are  not  the  only  expres- 
sions in  the  Ncav  Testament  which  are  applied  to  the 
same  subject :  for  men  were  required  to  be  changed, 
to  be  turned  from  the  error  of  their  ways — were  said 
to  have  passed  from  darkness  to  light,  from  the  power 
of  sin  and  Satan  to  the  service  of  God  and  the  wis- 
dom of  the  just.  In  short,  a  very  great  variety  of 
language  was  used  to  describe  the  process  of  becoming 
a  good  man,  and  a  follower  of  Christ. 


CONVERSION.  155 

But  the  figurative  expressions  just  referred  to,  have 
been  most  constantly  used  in  modern  times,  to  express 
that  change  which  is  meant  by  conversion.  The  rea- 
son for  this,  I  suppose,  is  obvious.  There  has  been  a 
striking  and  manifest  disposition,  ever  since  the  primi- 
tive simphcity  departed  from  religion,  to  regard  and 
treat  it  as  a  mystery :  and  therefore  the  most  obscure 
and  mysterious  expressions  have,  in  preference,  been 
adopted  to  set  it  forth.  The  figure  in  question,  I 
shall  soon  have  occasion  to  observe,  is  less  adapted  to 
set  forth  the  spiritual  nature  of  religion,  than  almost 
any  of  the  representations  that  are  current  in  the  New 
Testament. 

On  every  account,  therefore,  it  is  desirable  that  this 
language  should  be  explained,  and  that  the  explana- 
tion should  be  fixed  in  our  minds,  even  though  it 
should  require  some  repetition  to  do  it. 

What,  then,  is  the  meaning  of  the  phrase  "  being 
born  again?" 

I.  When  our  Saviour  said  to  the  inquiring  Nic- 
odemus,  "Except  a  man  be  born  again,"  we  may 
well  suppose,  that  he  did  not  use  language  either  new 
or  unintelligible  to  him.  Nor  would  it  comport  with 
a  proper  view  of  our  Saviour's  character,  to  suppose 
that  he  used  the  language  of  mystery.  Nicodemus, 
indeed,  aflfected  to  think  it  mysterious,  saying,  "  how 
can  a  man  be  born  when  he  is  old?"  It  was  not, 
however,  because  he  did  not  imderstand,  but  because 
he  did  understand  it.  For  the  language  in  question 
was  familiar  at  that  day  ;  it  was  in  the  mouth  of  every 
Jew,  much  more  in  that  of  a  master  in  Israel.  We 
learn,  from  the  Jewish  writers  of  that  day,  that  the 
phrase,  "  born  again,"  was  at  that  time,  and  had  been 
all  along,  applied  to  proselytes  from  paganism.  A 
convert,  or  a  proselyte  to  the  Jewish  religion,  was  cur- 


156  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

rently  denominated,  "  one  born  again,"  a  "new-bom 
child,"  "  a  new  creature."  This  language  they  adopted, 
doubtless,  to  express  what  they  considered  to  be  the 
greatness  of  the  distinction  and  favour  implied  in  being 
a  Jew.  It  was  nothing  less  than  a  "new  creation." 
In  the  apparent  misapprehension  of  Nicodemus,  there- 
fore, I  see  nothing  but  the  astonishment  natural  to  a 
Jew,  on  being  told  that  he,  favoured  of  God  as  he  had 
thought  himself;  that  he,  one  of  the  chosen  people, 
must  himself  pass  through  another  conversion,  another 
proselytism,  in  order  to  see  the  kingdom  of  God. 

But  to  revert  to  the  phrases,  which  conveyed  to 
Nicodemus  this  unwelcome  truth  ;  I  say  that  they 
referred  originally  to  proselytism  to  the  Jewish  religion. 
This  was  the  known  signification  of  these  phrases,  at 
the  time.  There  can  be  no  dispute  or  question  on 
this  point.  Something  like  this  use  of  these  phrases, 
was  common  among  other  nations  at  that  period,  as 
among  the  Romans,  the  change  from  slavery  to 
citizenship  was  denominated  "a  new  creation."  It 
appears,  then,  as  I  have  already  observed,  that  this 
expression  is  not  the  best  adapted  to  set  forth  the  spir- 
itual nature  of  religion,  since  it  was  originally  used  to 
describe  a  visible  fact,  an  outward  change. 

II.  But  let  us  proceed  from  the  Jewish  use  of  this 
language,  to  the  adoption  of  it  among  the  first  teachers 
of  Christianity.  It  was  natural  that  the  Christian 
teachers,  in  calling  men  from  an  old  to  a  new  dispen- 
sation, from  the  profession  of  an  old,  to  the  reception 
of  a  new  religion,  should  take  up  those  expressions, 
which  before  had  been  applied  to  an  event  precisely 
similar.  There  was  a  visible  change  of  religion 
required  both  of  Jews  and  Pagans,  the  adoption  of  a 
new  faith  and  worship.  It  was  an  event  publicly 
declared  and  solemnized  by  the  rite  of  baptism. 


CONVERSION.  157 

Far  be  it  from  me  to  say,  that  the  Gospel  required 
nothing  but  an  outward  profession  and  proselytism. 
This  was  too  true  of  Judaism,  though  without  doubt 
there  were  devout  individuals  among  the  Jews,  who 
had  more  spiritual  views.  But  it  was  too  true  of  that 
nation  of  formalists,  that  they  desired  little  more  than 
to  make  proselytes  to  their  rites  and  ceremonies.  And 
on  this  account  our  Saviour  upbraids  them,  in  that 
severe  declaration,  "Ye  compass  sea  and  land  to' make 
one  proselyte,  and  when  he  is  made,  ye  make  him 
two-fold  more  a  child  of  hell  than  yourselves  :"  ye  pro- 
selyte him  to  your  own  proud,  Pharisaical,  and 
conceited  system  of  cabahstic  notions  and  dead  form- 
alities. But  surely,  if  there  ever  were  upon  earth, 
teachers  who  most  strenuously  insisted  upon  a  spiritual 
renovation,  they  were  Jesus  and  his  Apostles.  Still, 
ho^vever,  we  are  not  to  forget,  that  their  language,  in 
reference  to  the  change  required,  implied  an  outward 
proselytism,  as  well  as  a  spiritual  renovation  ;  implied 
the  reception  of  a  new  religion,  considered  as  a  matter 
of  speculation,  faith  and  visible  worship,  as  well  as  the 
adoption  of  inward  feelings,  accordant  with  the  spirit 
and  precepts  of  this  religion.  Both  of  these  things 
they  must  have  demanded  by  their  very  situation,  as 
teachers  of  Christianity. 

III.  The  way  is  now  prepared  to  consider  what 
meaning  the  language  of  our  text  is  to  have,  w^hen 
applied  to  memhers  of  Christian  communities  iii  mo- 
dern times.  And  the  discrimination  to  be  made  here 
is  perfectly  evident.  One  part  of  the  meaning,  an- 
ciently attached  to  this  language,  fails  entirely :  the 
other  stands  in  the  nature  of  things,  and  must  stand 
for  ever.  What  fails,  is  what  relates  to  the  outward 
change.  There  can  be  no  proselytism  to  a  new  faith 
among  us  ;  no  conversion  to  a  new  worship ;  no  adop- 
14 


168  THE    ANALOGY    OP    RELIGION. 

tion  of  a  new  system,  nor  adherence  to  a  new  sect. 
All  the  conversion,  therefore,  that  can  now  take  place, 
is  of  a  purely  moral  or  sphitual  nature.  It  is  a  change 
of  heart,  a  change  of  character,  of  feelings,  of  habits. 
Where  the  character,  the  feelings,  and  habits  are 
wrong,  and  in  such  proportion  as  they  are  wrong,  this 
change  is  to  be  urged  as  the  very  condition  of  salva- 
tion, of  happiness,  of  enjoying  peace  of  conscience, 
God's  forgiveness,  and  the  reasonable  hope  of  heaven. 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  king- 
dom of  God." 

The  subject,  in  this  view  of  it,  would  seem  to  be 
exceedingly  plain.  Conversion  is  no  mysterious  doc- 
trine. It  is  no  peculiar  injunction  or  precept  of  the 
Christian  religion.  It  is  the  injunction  and  precept  of 
every  religion.  The  bad  man  must  become  a  good 
man  ;  the  sinful  must  repent ;  the  vicious  must  reform ; 
the  selfish,  the  passionate  and  sensual,  must  be  pure 
and  gentle  and  benevolent ;  or  they  cannot  be  happy 
here  or  hereafter.  This,  I  say,  is  no  mysterious  doc- 
trine. It  is  what  every  man's  conscience  preaches  to 
him.  Strange  would  it  be,  if,  in  a  religion  so  simple 
and  reasonable  as  ours,  that  on  which  everything  in 
our  moral  welfare  hangs  should  be  a  mystery ;  strange, 
if  a  stumbling-block  should  be  placed  at  the  very  en- 
trance to  the  way  of  religion. 

But  simple,  obvious  and  unquestionable  as  these 
views  of  conversion  are,  there  is  no  little  difficulty  in 
obtaining  for  them  a  general  assent,  or  in  causing  them 
to  be  fully  carried  out  in  the  minds  of  those  who 
embrace  them.  The  true  and  natural  view  of  the 
subject  is  confounded  with  the  ancient  features  of  it. 
We  are  thinking  of  something  like  a  proselytism,  of  a 
time  and  an  epoch,  and  a  great  experience,  and  a  sud- 
den change.     We  have,  perhaps,  been  ta eight  all  this 


CONVERSION.  159 

from  our  youth  up.  We  have  heard  about  obtaining 
rehgion,  as  if  it  were  something  else  than  obtaining 
inward  habits  of  devotion  and  self  government,  and 
disinterestedness  and  forbearance  and  all  goodness, 
which  it  takes  a  life  fully  to  acquire  and  confirm.  We 
have  heard  about  obtaining  religion,  or  obtaining  a 
change,  or  obtaining  a  hope,  as  if  it  were  the  work  of 
a  month,  or  a  day,  or  a  moment.  It  demands  years,  or 
a  life,  to  obtain  a  great  property,  or  to  obtain  learning, 
or  to  build  up  a  distinguished  reputation  ;  while  the 
far  greater  work  of  gaining  a  holy  mind,  a  pure  and 
good  heart,  you  would  suppose,  from  what  you  often 
hear,  could  be  accomplished  in  a  single  week,  or  hour. 
I  do  not  forget  that  religion  has  its  beginning;  and 
if  the  language  in  common  use  was,  that  at  such  a 
time,  a  man  began  to  be  religious,  instead  of  having 
becoipe  so,  I  should  have  no  objection  to  it.  I  do  not 
deny  that  there  are  epochs  in  religious  experience, 
times  of  deeper  reflection,  of  more  solemn  impression 
and  more  earnest  prayer;  times  of  arousing  to  the 
moral  faculties,  of  awakening  to  the  conscience,  of 
concern  and  solicitude  about  the  interests  of  the 
soul;  and  I  would  to  God,  these  times  were  more 
frequent  in  the  experience  of  us  all!  It  was  in  con- 
formity with  this  view,  that  Whitfield  said,  that  "He 
wished  he  could  be  converted  a  thousand  times  every 
day."  I  do  not  deny,  then,  that  there  are  epochs  in 
religious  feeling.  On  the  contrary,  I  believe  that  the 
whole  progress  of  every  mind  and  of  every  life,  may, 
to  a  considerable  extent  of  its  history,  be  dated  from 
certain  epochs.  A  man  will  find  it  to  have  been  so  in 
his  mind  and  in  his  studies.  Certain  impressions  have 
been  made  upon  him  at  certain  periods,  in  consequence 
of  which  he  has  taken  up  some  new  study,  or  pursued 
the  old  with  greater  zeal ;  certain  impressions  which 


160  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

have  given  a  bias  and  character  to  his  whole  mind. 
And  those  who  are  pursuing  more  visible  acquisitions 
than  those  of  the  mind,  may  have  found  it  so  with 
them.  At  some  certain  period  they  began  this  work ; 
and  at  other  periods  they  have  been  stimulated  to  new 
diligence ;  they  have  resolved  to  use  greater  economy, 
industry  and  method.  There  is  a  beginning,  then, 
and  there  are  epochs  in  every  pursuit;  but  who  ever 
thought  of  confounding,  as  men  do  in  religion,  the 
beginning  with  the  end,  the  epoch  with  the  progress, 
the  starting  place  with  the  goal  of  attainment?  Who 
ever  thought  of  calling  the  first  enthusiasm  of  the 
youthful  student,  learning ;  or  the  first  crude  essays 
of  the  young  artist,  skill  7 

Does  it  seem  to  any  one,  that  I  do  injustice  to  the 
popular  impressions  about  religion  ?  Am  I  reminded 
that,  although  men  do  say  that  they  get  religion  at  a 
certain  time,  yet  that  they  are  taught,  also,  that  they 
must  grow  in  this,  that  they  have  acquired  only  the 
first  elements,  and  must  go  on  to  perfection?  Still  I 
say,  that  the  language  is  wrong ;  the  language,  Avhich 
implies,  that  he  who  has  acquired  the  first  elements  of 
such  a  thing,  has  acquired  the  thing  itself,  is  wrong. 
But.  I  say  more.  I  say  it  is  a  language  that  leads  to 
wrong.  A  man,  who  uses  it,  will  be  apt  to  think  he 
has  obtained  more  than  he  really  has  obtained.  He 
will  be  apt  to  think  more  highly  of  himself,  than  he 
ought  to  think.  His  language  implies  too  much,  and 
of  course  it  is  liable  to  pufF  him  up  with  pride;  to 
make  him  think  well  of  himself,  and  speak  slightly  of 
others,  rather  than  to  awaken  in  him  a  proper  and  true 
humility;  and  to  inspire  a  rash  confidence  and  a 
visionary  joy,  rather  than  a  just  sobriety  and  a  reason- 
able self-distrust.  And  I  say  still  farther,  and  repeat, 
that  there  are  false  impressions  about  religion  itself, 


CONVERSION.  161 

derived  from  these  notions  of  conversion.  Religion  is 
not  felt  to  be  that  result  of  patient  endeavour  which  it 
is.  It  is  made  a  thing  too  easy  of  acquisition.  He 
who,  in  one  Aveek,  in  one  day,  in  one  hour,  nay,  in  one 
moment,  can  pass  through  a  change  that  insures 
heaven  to  him,  has  reduced  the  mighty  work  to  a  light 
task  indeed.  He  may  boast  over  those  who  are  taking 
the  way  of  patient  and  pains-taking  endeavour;  he 
may  charge  them  with  the  guilt  of  insisting  much  on 
a  good  moral  life  ;  but  certainly  he  should  not  boast  of 
his  own  way  as  the  most  thorough  and  laborious. 

But  I  must  dwell  a  little  more  particularly,  in  regard 
to  conversion,  on  that  comparison  which  I  proposed  to 
make  between  religion  and  other  acquisitions  of  the 
mind.  And  the  special  point  to  be  considered,  the  only 
one,  indeed,  about  which  there  is  any  difference  of 
opinion,  is  the  alleged  suddenness  of  conversion.  I 
have  already  said  that  this  is  a  feature  of  the  change 
in  question,  which  is  borrowed  from  the  ancient  con- 
version, and  borrowed  too,  from  the  outward  and 
visible  part  of  it.  I  now  say  that  it  cannot  appertain 
to  what  is  inward  and  spiritual.  No  change  of  the 
inward  mind  and  character  can  be  sudden.  The  very 
laws  of  the  mind  forbid  it. 

But  I  must  not  fail  to  show  you  that  the  comparison 
I  am  about  to  make  is  founded  on  the  strictest  analogy. 
It  will  be  said,  I  know,  that  the  change  we  are 
speaking  of  is  unlike  any  other,  and  therefore,  that  the 
ordinary  processes  of  the  mind  furnish  no  analogy  for 
it.  But  in  what  is  it  unlike  ?  It  is  a  change ;  a  change 
of  heart ;  a  change  in  the  affections,  dispositions,  habits 
of  the  soul.  Moreover,  it  is  a  change  effected  in  view 
of  motives.  A  man  becomes  a  good  man,  not  blindly, 
not  irrationally,  but  for  certain  reasons.  He  feels  that 
the  evil  course  is  dangerous,  and  therefore  he  resolves 
14# 


i®3-  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

to  turn  from  it.  He  believes  that  there  is  happiness  in 
religion,  and  therefore  he  seeks  it.  More  than  all,  he 
feels  that  he  ought  to  be  a  good  man,  and  therefore  he 
strives  to  be  so.  But  still  it  may  be  said,  there  is  a 
difference ;  and  that  the  difference  consists  in  this ; 
that  conversion  is  wrought  in  the  soul  by  the  special 
act  of  God ;  that  the  work  is  supernatural ;  that  tlie 
change  is  a  miracle.  Grant  that  it  be  so.  Suppose  it 
to  be  true,  perhaps  it  is  true,  that  the  secret  reluctance 
of  the  mind  to  resist  its  wrong  tendencies,  and  to 
restrain  its  evil  passions  is  such,  that  a  special  act  of 
God  is  always  exerted  to  put  it  in  the  right  way.  But 
will  God,  who  made  the  soul,  who  formed  every  part 
of  its  curious  and  wonderful  mechanism,  derange  the 
operations  of  that  soul,  in  order  to  save  it?  Let  any 
one  say,  if  he  pleases,  that  it  is  a  dead  soul,  a  mechan- 
ism without  any  motion,  and  that  nothing  but  a  special 
impulse  from  its  Former  can  ever  set  it  in  motion. 
But  when  it  does  move,  will  it  not  move  in  obedience 
to  the  laws  of  its  nature  ?  This,  be  it  observed,  is  all 
that  we  say,  to  make  out  the  assumed  analogy.  Let 
the  cause  of  its  operations  be  what  it  will,  we  say  that 
the  laws  of  its  operations  will  be  always  the  same ;  in 
other  words,  that  the  religious  action  of  the  soul  takes 
place  after  the  same  manner,  follows  the  same  pro- 
cesses, as  all  other  action  of  the  soul.  This,  certainly, 
is  the  testimony  of  all  experience.  No  one  finds 
himself  becoming  religious  under  any  other  influence 
than  that  of  motives  of  some  sort.  No  man  finds  it 
an  easier  or  speedier  work  to  become  a  Christian,  than 
to  pass  from  ignorance  to  learning,  from  indolence  of 
mind  to  activity,  from  low  to  lofty  tastes,  or  from  any 
one  state  of  mind  to  any  other.  Our  conclusion,  then,  is 
based  on  facts ;  it  is  therefore  the  dictate  of  philosophy  j 


CONVERSION. 


163 


and  it  certainly  is,  so  far  as  I  know,  the  doctrine  of  ail 
rational  theology. 

The  processes  of  religious  experience,  therefore,  are 
to  be  judged  of  like  the  processes  of  all  other  experi- 
ence.    Suppose,  then,  that  you  knew  a  man  who  was 
indolent  in  spirit  and  infirm  of  purpose ;  and  that  you 
had  sought  and  found  the  means,  at  some  favouring 
moment,  to  arouse  him  from  his  lethargy,  and  to  put 
him  in  the  path  of  action.     Would  you  say  that  in  the 
hour  of  his  first  impression,  of  his  first  resolution^  he 
had  become  a  man  of  energy  and  firmness?     Nay, 
how  long  would  it  probably  be,  before  he  could  be  justly 
said  to  bear  that  character?     Or,  suppose  that  you 
knew  a  parent  who  neglected  the  care  of  his  children, 
and  that,  inviting  him  some  day  to  your  apartment, 
you  had,  by  many  reasonings,  so  impressed  his  mind 
with' the  dangers  of  this  course  of  neglect,  that  he  had 
resolved  to  amend ;    and  suppose  that  by  the  aid  of 
many  such  impressions  and  resolutions,  he  should,  at 
length,  become  a  good  parent.     Would  you  say  that 
you  had  sent  him  from  your  house  that  day,  a  good 
parent?     If  you  did  so,  I  am  sure  that  your  sober 
neighbours   would   hold   your   language  to  be  very 
strange,  and  would  not  a  httle  suspect  you  of  being  no 
better  than  a  credulous  enthusiast.     Or  suppose,  once 
more,  that  having  a  friend  who  was  devoid  of  all  taste, 
you  should  suddenly  open  a  gallery  of  pictures  and 
statues  to  him,  and  thus  rouse  the  dormant  facuUy. 
Would  you  say,  on  the  strength  of  that  first  impulse 
to   improvement,  he  had  become  a   man  of  taste? 
Why,  then,  shall  it  be  said,  that  a  bad  man,  in  bare 
virtue  of  one  single  hour  of  rehgious  impressions,  has 
become  a  good  man?     Religious  affections  have  no 
growth  pecuhar  to  themselves,  no  other  growth  than 
all  other  affections. 


164  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

The  phrase  most  frequently  used  to  describe  the 
suddenness  of  conversion,  is  that  of  ohtaining  religion. 
It  is  said  that,  at  a  certain  time,  a  man  has  "obtained 
rehgion."  Now  I  am  persuaded  that,  if  we  should 
separate  religion  into  its  parts,  or  view  it  under  its 
practical  aspects,  no  such  phrase  could  be  found,  at 
any  given  moment,  to  apply  to  it.  What  would  be 
thought  of  it,  if  it  were  said  that,  at  any  one  moment, 
a  man  had  obtained  devotion,  or  a  gentle  disposition  ! 
Let  a  man  undertake  the  contest  with  his  anger  ;  and 
how  long  will  it  take  to  subdue  that  passion  to  gentle- 
ness and  meekness  ?  How  long  will  it  be,  before  he 
w\W.  stand  calm  and  unmoved,  when  the  word  of  insult 
breaks  upon  his  ear,  or  the  storm  of  provocation  beats 
upon  his  head  !  Or  let  him  endeavour  to  acquire  a 
habit  of  devotion  ;  and  how  many  times  will  he  have 
occasion  bitterly  to  lament  that  his  thoughts  of  God 
are  so  few  and  cold ;  that  he  is  so  slow  of  heart  to 
commune  with  the  all-pervading  presence  that  fills 
heaven  and  earth  !  Perhaps  years  will  pass  on,  and 
he  will  feel  that  he  is  yet  but  beginning  to  learn  this 
great  wisdom,  and  to  partake  of  this  unspeakable  joy. 
Or  to  take  a  word  still  more  practical ;  what  would 
you  think  of  a  man  who  should  say,  that,  at  a  certain 
time,  he  had  obtained  virtue  ?  "  What  idea,"  you 
would  exclaim,  "  has  this  man  of  virtue  ?  Some 
strange  and  visionary  idea  surely  !"  you  would  say, 
"  something  different  from  the  notion,  which  all  other 
men  have  of  virtue."  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  this 
instance  detects  and  lays  open  the  whole  peculiarity 
of  the  common  impression  about  a  religious  conversion. 
Virtue  implies  a  habit  of  feeling  and  a  course  of  life. 
It  is  the  complexion  of  a  man's  whole  character,  and 
not  one  particular  and  constrained  posture  of  the  feel- 
ings.    Virtue  is  not  a  thing  that  walks  the  stage  for 


CONVERSION.  165 

an  hour,  with  a  crowd  around  it ;  it  walks  in  the  quiet 
and  often  lonely  paths  of  real  life.  Virtue,  in  short,  is 
a  rational,  habitual,  long-continued  course  of  feelings 
and  actions.  And  just  as  much  is  religion  all  this. 
Religion  is  just  as  rational,  habitual,  abiding.  What 
do  I  say  ?  Religion  and  virtue  are  the  same  thing  in 
principle.  Religion  involves  virtue  as  a  part  of  itself 
And  in  that  part  of  it  which  relates  to  God,  it  is  still 
just  as  rational  surely,  and  habitual  and  permanent  in 
the  mind,  as  m  that  part  of  it  which  relates  to  man. 
That  is  to  say,  piety  is  just  as  much  so  as  virtue. 
And  it  is  therefore  as  great  and  strange  a  mistake,  for 
a  man  to  say,  that  he  obtained  religion  at  a  certain 
time,  as  it  would  be  to  say,  that  at  a  certain  time  he 
obtained  virtue.  Neither  of  them  can  be  obtained  so 
suddenly. 

To  sum  up  what  I  have  said  ;  conversion  originally 
meant  two  things,  an  outward  proselytism  and  an  in- 
ward change.  It  was  the  former  of  these  only  that 
was,  or  could  be  sudden  and  instantaneous.  An 
idolater  came  into  the  Christian  assembly  and  pro- 
fessed his  faith  in  the  true  God,  and  in  Jesus,  as  his 
messenger.  This,  of  course,  was  done  at  a  particular 
time.  But  this  meaning  of  the  term  has  no  application 
to  Christian  communities  at  the  present  day.  Or  there 
was  a  certain  time,  when  the  Pagan  or  the  Jew  became 
convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  Christian  religion,  and 
therefore  embraced  it  as  his  own.  And  hence  it  was 
that  faith,  rather  than  love,  became  the  grand  repre- 
sentative and  denomination  of  Christian  piety.  This 
faith,  like  every  result  in  mere  reasoning,  might  have 
its  birth  and  its  complete  existence  on  a  given  and 
assignable  day,  when  some  miracle  was  performed 
before  its  eyes,  or  some  extraordinary  evidence  was 
presented.     But  these  ideas  evidently  cannot  apply  to 


166  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

nations  brought  up  in  the  forms  and  faith  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Anciently,  then,  conversion  was  sudden.  It  was  so 
from  the  very  necessity  of  the  case.  But  from  the 
same  necessity  of  the  case  it  cannot  be  so  now.  That 
which  was  sudden  in  conversion,  the  change  of  cere- 
monies, of  faith,  of  worship,  of  rehgion  as  a  system, 
fails  in  its  application  to  us ;  while  that  which  remains, 
the  spiritual  renovation  of  the  heart,  is  the  very  reverse 
of  sudden  ;  it  is  the  slowest  of  all  processes. 

The  notice  of  one  or  two  objections,  that  may  be 
made  to  the  views  now  stated,  will,  I  think,  clear  up 
all  further  difficulties  with  the  subject :  and  with  this, 
I  shall  conclude  my  discourse. 

In  the  first  place,  if  the  bad  man,  when  he  resolves 
and  begins  to  be  a  good  man,  is  not  a  good  man  and 
a  Christian,  it  may  be  asked,  what  is  he  ?  and  what  is 
to  become  of  him,  if  he  dies  in  this  neutral  state? 
That  is  to  say,  if  as  a  bad  man  he  is  not  to  be  con- 
demned to  misery,  nor  as  a  good  man,  to  be  raised  to 
happiness,  what  is  the  disposition  to  be  made  of  his 
future  state? 

To  the  first  question,  what  is  he  ?  I  answer,  that 
he  is  just  a  man  who  resolves  and  begins  to  be  good, 
and  that  is  all  that  he  is.  And  to  the  second  question, 
I  reply,  that  he  shall  be  disposed  of,  not  according  to 
our  technical  distinctions,  but  according  to  the  exact 
measure  of  the  good  or  evil  that  is  in  him.  Let  us 
bring  these  questions  to  the  test  of  common  sense.  If  an 
ignorant  man,  who  resolves  and  begins  to  learn,  is  not 
a  learned  man,  what  is  he,  and  what  will  be  his  fate? 
If  a  passionate  man,  resolving  and  beginning  to  be 
meek,  is  not  a  meek  man,  what  is  he,  and  what  is  to 
become  of  him,  in  the  great  and  just  retribution  of 
character  ?     Do  not  these  questions  present  and  solve 


CONVERSION.  167 

all  the  difficulties  involved  in  the  objection?  They  are 
difficulties  that  belong  to  a  system  of  theology,  which 
regards  all  mankind  as  either  totally  evil  and  unre- 
generate,  or  essentially  regenerate  and  good  ;  a  system 
which  appears  to  me  as  much  at  war  with  common 
sense  and  common  experience,  as  would  be  that  system 
of  practical  philosophy,  which  should  account  all 
men  to  be  either  poor  or  rich,  either  weak  or  strong, 
either  miserable  or  happy,  and  admit  of  no  transition 
states  from  one  to  the  other. 

In  the  next  place,  it  may  possibly  be  objected  that 
the  views,  which  I  have  advanced  of  a  change  of 
heart  as  slow  and  gradual,  are  lax  and  dangerous. 
Men,  it  may  be  said,  upon  this  ground,  will  reason 
thus.  "Since  religion  is  the  work  of  life,  we  need  not 
concern  ourselves.  The  days  and  j^ears  of  life  are 
before  us,  and  we  can  attend  to  religion  by  and  by." 
But  because  religion  is  the  work  of  a  whole  life,  is  that 
a  reason  for  wasting  a  fair  portion  of  the  precious  and 
precarious  season?  Because  religion  is  the  work  of 
every  instant,  is  that  a  reason  for  letting  many  of 
them  pass  unimproved  ?  Because  the  work  of  religion 
cannot  be  done  at  once,  because  it  requires  the  long 
progress  of  days  and  years,  because  life  is  all  too  short 
for  it ;  is  that  a  reason  for  never  beginning  ?  Because, 
in  fine,  the  promise  of  heaven  depends  upon  a  character 
which  it  takes  a  long  time  to  form,  is  that  holding  out 
a  lure  to  ease  and  negligence  ?  I  know  of  no  doctrine 
more  alarming  to  the  negligent  than  this;  that  the 
Christian  virtue,  on  which  the  hope  of  heaven  depends, 
must  be  the  work  not  of  a  moment,  but,  at  the  least, 
of  a  considerable  period  of  time. 

Furthermore:  that  which  is  never  commenced,  can 
never  be  done.  That  which  is  never  begun,  can  never 
be  accomplished.     Be  it  urged  upon  every  one,  then. 


168  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

that  he  should  begin.  Be  it  urged,  with  most  solemn 
admonition,  upon  the  negligent  and  delaying.  I  care 
not  with  how  much  zeal  and  earnestness  he  enters 
upon  the  work,  if  he  will  but  remember,  that  in  any 
given  week  or  month  he  can  only  begin.  I  speak  not 
against  a  sober  and  awakened  solicitude,  against  the 
most  solemn  convictions,  against  the  most  anxious 
fears,  the  most  serious  resolutions,  the  most  earnest  and 
unwearied  prayers.  It  is  a  work  of  infinite  moment 
that  we  have  to  do.  It  is  an  infinite  welfare  that  is  at 
stake.  It  is  as  true  now  as  it  ever  was,  that  "except 
a  man  be  born  again,"  born  from  a  sensual  to  a 
spiritual  life,  born  from  moral  indolence  and  sloth  to 
sacred  effort  and  watchfulness  and  faith,  born  from  a 
worldly  to  a  heavenly  hope,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom 
of  God.  No  matter  what  we  call  it ;  conversion, 
regeneration,  or  amendment;  it  is  the  great  thing.  It 
is  the  burden  of  all  religious  instruction.  Let  no  one 
be  so  absurd  or  so  childish,  as  to  say,  that  conversion 
is  not  preached  among  us,  because  the  words  "  regene- 
ration," "new  creation,"  "born  again,"  are  not 
continually  upon  our  lips.  We  use  these  words 
sparingly,  because  they  are  constantly  misapprehended. 
But  the  thing;  the  turning  from  sin  to  holiness,  the 
forsakmg  of  all  evil  ways  by  repentance,  the  necessity 
of  being  pure  in  order  to  being  happy  here  and  here- 
after; what  else  is  our  preaching,  and  your  faith? 
What,  but  this,  is  the  object  of  every  religious  institu- 
tion and  precept  and  doctrine?  What,  but  this,  is 
every  dictate  of  conscience  and  every  command  of 
God  and  every  admonition  of  providence?  For  what, 
but  this,  did  Jesus  die,  and  for  what  else  is  the  spirit 
of  God  given?  What,  but  this,  in  fine,  is  the  interest 
of  life,  and  the  hope  of  eternity? 

My  friends,  if  I  can  understand  any  distinctions,  the 


CONVERSION.  169 

difference  between  the  prevailing  ideas  of  conversion, 
and  those  which  I  now  preach  to  you,  is,  that  the 
latter  are  out  of  all  comparison  the  most  solemn, 
awakening  and  alarming.  If  the  work  of  preparing 
for  heaven  could  be  done  in  a  moment,  then  might  it 
be  done  at  any  moment,  at  the  last  moment ;  and  the 
most  negligent  might  always  hope.  I  cannot  conceive 
of  any  doctrine  more  gratifying  and  quieting  to  negli- 
gence or  vice,  than  this.  If  in  candour  we  were  not 
obliged  to  think  otherwise,  it  would  seem  as  if  it  had 
been  invented  on  purpose  to  relieve  the  fears  of  a 
guilty,  procrastinating  conscience.  But  our  doctrine, 
on  the  contrary,  preaches  nothing  but  alarm  to  a  self- 
indulgent  and  sinful  life.  It  warns  the  bad  man  that 
the  time  may  come,  when,  though  he  may  most  earn- 
estly desire  to  prepare  for  heaven,  it  will  be  all  too  late. 
It  teHs  him  that  no  work  of  a  moment  can  save  him. 
As  we  tell  the  student  preparing  for  a  strict  examina- 
tion, that  he  must  study  long  before  he  can  be  ready ; 
that  no  momentary  struggle  or  agony  will  do  it ;  so  we 
tell  him  who  proposes  to  be  examined  as  a  disciple  of 
Christ,  a  pupil  of  Christianity,  that  the  preparation 
must  be  the  work  of  years,  the  work  of  life.  My 
friends,  I  beg  of  you  to  ponder  this  comparison.  It 
presents  to  you  the  naked  truth.  He,  who  would 
rationally  hope  for  heaven,  must  found  that  hope  not 
on  the  work  of  moments,  but  on  the  work  of  years ; 
not  on  any  suddenly  acquired  frame  of  mind,  but  on 
its  enduring  habit ;  not  on  a  momentary  good  resolu- 
tion, but  on  its  abiding  result ;  not  on  the  beginning 
of  his  faith,  but  on  its  end,  its  completion,  its  perfec- 
tion. 

15 


III. 

\ 

ON    THE    METHODS    OF  OBTAINING  AND  EXHIBITING 
RELIGIOUS    AND    VIRTUOUS    AFFECTIONS. 

And  when  thou  art  converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren. 

Luke  xxii.  32. 

I  AM  to  discourse  this  evening,  on  the  methods  of 
obtaining,  and  of  exhibiting  rehgious  and  virtuous 
affections.  In  selecting  the  text,  I  do  not  mean  to  say 
that  it  covers  the  whole  ground  of  this  two-fold  subject ; 
but  I  have  chosen  it,  partly  because  I  w^ish  to  connect 
the  first  topic  before  us  directly  with  my  last  discourse, 
and  because  the  second  topic,  the  methods  of  exhibit- 
ing religion,  is  distinctly  presented,  though  not  fully 
embraced  by  the  injunction,  "  strengthen  thy  brethren." 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  these  topics  ;  how  we  are  to 
become  religious ;  and  how  we  are  to  show  that  we 
are  so.  On  each  of  these  questions,  it  is  true,  that  a 
volume  might  be  written  ;  and  you  will  easily  infer 
that  I  should  not  have  brought  them  into  the  same 
discourse,  if  I  had  any  other  object  than  to  survey 
them  in  a  single  point  of  view.  That  point,  you  are 
apprised,  is  the  analogy  of  religion  to  other  subjects, 
or  to  other  states  of  mind. 

To  the  question,  then,  how  we  are  to  obtain  religious 
and  virtuous  affections  and  habits,  the  answer  is,  just 
as  we  obtain  any  affections  and  habits,  which  require 
attention  and  effort  in  order  to  their  acquisition.  They 
ought  to  be  cultivated  in  childhood,  just  as  the  love  of 


RELIGIOUS    AFFECTIONS.  171 

nature,  or  the  habit  of  study,  or  any  other  proper  affec- 
tion, or  state  of  mind  is  cultivated.  But  if  they  are 
not ;  if,  as  is  too  often  the  case,  a  man  grows  up  an 
irrehgious  or  vicious  man,  then,  the  first  step  towards 
a  change  of  heart  is  serious  reflection,  and  tlie  next 
step  is  vigorous  effort.  The  man  must  meditate,  and 
pray,  and  watch,  and  strive.  There  is  no  other  way 
to  become  good  and  pious,  than  this.  There  is  no 
easier  way. 

And  this  is  the  point  at  whicli  I  wished  to  connect 
the  topic  under  consideration  with  my  last  discourse. 
For  it  is  not  only  true,  that  the  demand  for  long  con- 
tinued effort,  for  a  series  of  patient  endeavours,  as  the 
passport  to  heaven,  is  more  strict  than  the  demand  for 
a  momentary  change ;  but  the  practical  results  of  the 
difference  are  likely  to  have  the  most  direct  and  serious 
bearing  on  the  question  before  us.     The  question  is, 
how  is  a  man  to  become  religious  and  good  ?     To  this 
question,  there  are  two  answers.     One  is,  that  a  man 
is  to  become  religious  and  good  by  passing  through  a 
sudden  change ;  a  change  which,  if  not  miraculous, 
has  no  precedent  nor   parallel   in    all    other   human 
experience.     The  other  answer  is,  that  a  man  is  to 
become  religious  and  good,  just  as  he  is  to  become  wise 
in  learning,  or  skilful  in  art,  so  far  as  the  mode  is  con- 
cerned :  that  is,  by  the  regular  and  faithful  application 
of  his  powers  to  that  end,  by  the  repetition  of  humble 
endeavours,  by  the  slow  and  patient  forming  of  habits, 
by  little  acquisitions  made  day  after  day,  by  continual 
watchfulness  and  effort,  and  the  seeking  of  heavenly 
aid.     In  the  former  case,  the  thing  that  a  man  looks 
for,  is  a  sudden  and  extraordinary  change  in  his  affec- 
tions, wrought  out  by  a  special  influence  from  above. 
And  although  much  is  to  be  done  afterwards ;  yet  till 
this  is  done,  nothing  is  done.      Much  is  to  be  done 


172  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

afterwards,  it  is  true,  as  a  matter  of  duty ;  but  nothing 
more  is  necessary  to  make  out  the  title  to  heaven. 
There  is  to  be  a  progressive  sanctification  as  a  conse- 
quence of  the  change ;  but  salvation  depends  on  the 
change  itself.  Everything  turns  upon  this  mysterious 
•point  of  conversion. 

Now,  can  I  be  mistaken  in  thinking,  that  such  a 
reference  to  this  point  must  tend  to  derange  the  whole 
system  of  rational  motives  ?  Must  it  not  take  off  the 
pressure  and  urgency  of  the  natural  inducements  to 
act?  Suppose,  to  resume  the  comparison,  which  I 
made  in  the  close  of  my  last  discourse,  that  a  man  has 
before  him  a  certain  study  to  which  he  ought  to  attend. 
He  is,  perhaps,  to  be  examined  upon  it  a  year  hence, 
and  on  this  examination  is  to  depend  his  introduction 
into  professional  life.  And  to  make  the  parallel  com- 
plete, suppose  that  he  is  averse  to  study.  He  is 
indolent.  He  puts  off  the  matter  to-day,  and  to-mor- 
row ;  one,  two  or  three  weeks  pass,  and  he  has  done 
nothing.  But  all  the  while  the  conviction  is  pressing 
harder  and  harder  upon  him,  that  this  will  never  do  ; 
that  he  must  begin  ;  and  at  length  he  does  begin,  and 
proceed,  and  persevere  ;  nay,  he  comes  to  like  his  task  ; 
he  enjoys  his  industry  more  than  ever  he  enjoyed  his 
indolence  ;  he  finishes  the  work,  and  gains  an  honour- 
able place  in  a  learned  profession.  Now,  this  man 
was  placed  under  the  natural  and  healthful  influence 
of  motives  ;  and  it  is  under  such  influences  I  contend, 
and  through  such  processes,  that  a  man  is  to  become 
a  Christian.  But  suppose  that  this  man,  the  candidate 
for  literary  honours,  had  been  looking  for  some  sudden 
and  extraordinary  change  in  his  mind,  which  was  to 
take  place,  when,  or  how,  he  could  not  tell ;  it  might 
be  in  the  first  month,  or  in  the  second,  or  even  in  the 
eleventh  month  of  his  probation ;  a  change,  too,  with- 


RELIGIOUS    AFFECTIONS.  173 

out  which  nothing  could  avail  him,  and  with  which, 
all  was  safe.  Does  not  every  one  see  that  the  pressure 
of  ordinary  motives  is  nearly  taken  off?  Does  not 
every  one  see,  that  a  man  so  circumstanced  is  very 
likely  to  go  on,  without  ever  applying  himself  thor- 
oughly and  resolutely  to  the  work  in  hand  ? 

And  what  else,  I  am  tempted  to  ask,  is  to  account 
for  the  apathy  and  neglect  of  multitudes  towards  the 
greatest  of  all  concerns  ?     Do  not  tell  me,  my  brethren, 
that  you  have  escaped  this  error,  because  you  have 
embraced  more  rational  ideas  of  conversion.     It  is  an 
error,  I  fear,  which  has  infected  the  religion  of  the 
whole  world.     Almost  all  men  are  expecting  to  become 
religious  and  devout  in  some  extraordinari/  ivay  ;  in 
a  way  for  which  the  ordinary  changes  of  character 
furnish  no  analogy.     This  is  the  fatal  barrier  of  error 
that  surrounds   the  world,  and  defends  it  from  the 
pressiire  of  ordinary  motives.     Evils  and  temptations 
enough,  I  know  there  are,  within  that  barrier  ;  but  if 
there  be  anything  without  it,  if  there  be  anything  in 
the  shape  of  opinion  more  fatal  than  everything  else 
to  religious  attainment ;  it  must  be  that  which  inter- 
feres with  the    felt  necessity  of  immediate,   urgent, 
practical,  persevering  endeavour  !     The  doctrine  of 
sudden  conversion,  I  conceive,  is  precisely  such  an 
opinion.     Let  such  a  doctrine  be  applied  to  any  other 
subject  than  religion,  to  the  attainment  of  any  mental 
habit,  of  learning  or  of  art,  and  I  am  sure  that  it  would 
be  seen  to  have  this  fatal  influence.     And  I  fear  that 
it  has  not  only  paralyzed  religiovis  exertion,  but  that 
it  has  the  effect  to  deter  many  from  all  approach  to 
religion ;  that  to  many,  this  extraordinary  conversion 
is  a  mystery,  and  a  v/onder,  and  a  fear.     I  apprehend 
that  by  many  it  is  regarded  as  a  crisis,  a  paroxysm,  a 
fearful  initiation  into  the  secrets  of  religion  ;  and  that, 
15* 


174  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

in  consequencej  religion  itself  is  regarded  by  multitudes, 
as  the  mysteries  were  in  ancient  times  ;  that  is  to  say, 
as  a  matter  of  which  they  know  nothing,  and  can 
know  nothing,  till  they  have  passed  the  gate  of  initia- 
tion ;  till  they  have  learnt  the  meaning  of  this  solemn 
pass-word,  conversion.  Hence  it  is  that  vital  religion 
is  looked  upon  by  the  mass  of  the  community,  as  a 
matter  with  which  they  have  nothing  to  do ;  they  give 
it  up  to  the  Church,  to  converts,  to  the  initiated ;  and 
that,  which  should  press  down  upon  the  whole  world, 
like  the  boundless  atmosphere,  the  religion  of  the  sky, 
the  religion  of  the  universe,  the  religion  of  universal 
truth  and  all-embracing  welfare,  has  become  a  flaming 
sword  upon  the  gates  of  paradise  ! 

I  proceed  now  to  the  exhibition  or  manifestation  of 
religion.  And  the  rule  here  is,  that  a  man  should 
manifest  his  religious  affections  no  otherwise,  than  as 
he  manifests  any  serious,  joyful  and  earnest  affections 
he  may  possess.  This,  I  have  no  doubt,  Avill  appear 
to  be  the  most  interesting  and  effective,  as  well  as  the 
most  proper  display  of  them. 

Exhibition,  manifestation,  display  on  such  a  subject, 
are  words,  I  confess,  which  are  not  agreeable  to  me ; 
and  on  this  point,  I  shall  soon  speak.  That  is  seldom 
the  most  powerful  exhibition  of  character,  which  a 
man  makes  on  set  purpose.  And  therefore  I  should 
say,  even  if  it  were  contended  that  religion  is  a  peculiar 
cause  committed  to  the  good  man,  which  he  is  bound 
to  advocate  and  advance  in  the  world  by  peculiar 
exertions,  still  that  he  will  not  ordinarily  so  well 
succeed  by  direct  attempt,  as  by  an  indirect  influence. 

But  let  us  take  up,  for  a  few  moments,  the  general 
subject.     We  are  speaking  of  religious  manifestation ; 
and,  I  say,  that  a  man's  religion  is  to  assume  no  pecu 
liar  appearances,  because  it  is  religion.     I  do  not  say, 


RELIGIOUS    AFFECTIONS.  175 

no  appearances  appropriate  to  itself.  All  traits  and 
forms  of  character  have,  to  a  certain  extent,  their 
appropriate  disclosures.  So  far,  religion  may  have 
them ;  but.  in  consistency  with  good  sense,  no  farther. 
Our  Lord  said  to  Peter,  "When  thou  art  converted, 
strengthen  thy  brethren."  A  good  man  should 
strengthen  his  brethren ;  but,  in  order  to  do  this  to 
the  best  purpose,  he  is  to  strengthen  his  brethren  in 
religion,  no  otherwise  than  he  would  strengthen  his 
brethren  in  patriotism,  in  learning,  or  in  any  other 
cause.  That  is  to  say,  he  is  to  be  governed  by  the 
general  and  just  principles  of  mutual  influence.  He 
is  to  give  his  countenance,  his  sympathy,  his  counsel 
on  proper  occasions ;  but  he  is  not  to  go  about  exhorting 
at  all  corners,  assuming  an  air  of  superiority,  speaking 
in  oracular  and  sepulchral  tones ;  if  he  does  so,  he  will 
be  liable  to  be  considered  intrusive,  impertinent,  and 
disagreeable.  I  would  speak  with  a  sacred  caution 
on  this  point.  I  Avould  quench  no  holy  fire.  Our  fault 
is  too  liable  to  be  reserve.  And  w^ell  can  I  conceive 
that  there  may  be  times,  when  a  man  may  fitly  and 
solemnly  say,  "stand  fast,  my  brother,  keep  thine 
integrity ; "  or  emergencies  of  social  temptation,  when 
the  zealous  Christian  may  say,  "  let  us  strengthen  each 
other's  hands,  and  encourage  each  other's  hearts  in  the 
holy  cause  of  duty."  The  same  thing  may  be  done  in 
every  other  cause,  whether  of  justice  or  humanity. 
All  that  I  contend  for  is,  that  the  same  good  sense,  the 
same  courtesy,  the  same  liberality,  shall  govern  a  man 
in  one  case,  as  in  the  other. 

Undoubtedly,  a  religious  and  good  man  will  appear 
on  many  occasions  differently  from  another  man,  and 
differently,  in  proportion  as  he  is  religious  and  good. 
But  he  will  not  appear  so  always^  nor  in  things  indif- 
ferent.    There  may  be  nothing  to  distinguish  him  in 


176  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

his  gait,  his  countenance  or  demeanour.  Still  there  will 
be  occasions,  Avhen  his  character  will  come  out ;  many 
occasions.  His  actions,  his  course  of  life,  his  senti- 
ments, on  a  great  many  occasions,  will  show  his 
character.  And  these  sentiments  he  will  express  in 
conversation ;  so  that  his  conversation  will  be  thus  far 
different.  But  still  the  disclosures  of  his  character  will 
all  be  natural.  He  will  show  you  that  he  is  interested 
in  religion,  just  as  he  shows  you  that  he  is  interested 
about  every  thing  else,  by  natural  expressions  of 
countenance  and  tones  of  voice,  by  natural  topics  of 
conversation  and  habits  of  conduct.  In  short,  there 
Avill  be  an  appropriate  exhibition  of  religious  character, 
but  nothing  singular  or  strange. 

Now,  for  multitudes  of  persons,  this  will  not  do ;  it 
is  not  enough.  They  want  something  peculiar. 
There  are  many,  indeed,  who  are  not  satisfied,  unless 
there  is  something  peculiar  in  the  looks  and  manners 
of  a  man  to  mark  him  out  as  religious.  Who  does  not 
know  how  constantly  a  clergyman  has  been,  and  still 
is,  to  a  great  extent,  known,  everywhere,  by  these 
marks?  And  what  is  more  common,  than  for  the  new 
convert  to  put  on  a  countenance  and  deportment,  which 
causes  all  his  acquaintance  to  say,  "How  strangely  he 
appears!"  And  many,  I  repeat,  would  have  it  so. 
They  would  have  a  man  not  only  belong  to  the 
kingdom  of  Christ,  but  carry  also  some  peculiar  marks 
and  badges  of  it.  They  would  have  him  wear  his 
religion  as  a  military  costume,  that  they  may  know,  as 
they  say,  under  what  colours  he  fights.  But  let  us 
remember,  that  many  a  coward  has  worn  a  coat  of 
mail,  and  many  a  brave  man  has  felt  that  he  did  not 
need  one.  And  many  a  bad  man,  I  would  rather  say 
many  a  misguided  man,  has  put  on  a  solemn  counte- 
nance, and  carried  a  stiff  and  formal  gait,  and  got  all 


RELIGIOUS     AFFECTIONS.  177 

the  vocabulary  of  cant  by  heart;  and  many  a  good 
man  has  felt  that  he  could  do  without  these  trappings 
of  a  mistaken  and  erring  piety.  Nor  let  it  be  forgotten, 
that  just  in  proportion  as  this  peculiarity  of  religious 
manifestation  prevails,  hypocrisy  prevails.  It  is  easier 
to  put  on  a  costume,  than  it  is  to  adopt  a  real  character. 
Religion,  for  its  own  defence  against  pretenders,  as  well 
as  for  its  usefulness  in  the  world,  should  demand 
sobriety,  simplicity,  naturalness  and  truth  of  behaviour, 
from  all  its  votaries. 

I  do  not  mean,  in  saying  this,  to  confound  sancti- 
mony with  hypocrisy,  or  bad  taste  with  bad  morals. 
The  same  distinctions  apply  to  this,  as  to  every  other 
subject.  A  man  of  real  learning  may  be  a  pedant. 
A  man  of  real  skill  may  lack  the  simplicity  which  is 
its  highest  ornament.  A  really  able  statesman  may 
practise  some  finesse.  A  truly  wise  man  may  put  on 
an  air  of  unnecessary  gravity,  or  be  something  too 
much  a  man  of  forms.  But  we  all  agree  that  these  are 
faults.  We  always  desire  that  all  unnecessary  pecu- 
liarities should  be  laid  aside;  that  no  man  should 
obtrude  upon  others  his  gifts  or  qualifications ;  that  he 
should  leave  them  to  speak  when  they  are  called  for. 
Li  other  words,  we  demand  good  breeding  in  every 
other  case ;  and  I  say  emphatically,  that  good  breeding 
is  equally  to  be  demanded  in  religion.  No  man  is  the 
worse  Christian  for  being  a  well-bred  man ;  nor  is  he, 
for  that  reason,  the  less  decided  Christian. 

Next  to  the  general  manners  as  modes  of  exhibiting 
religion,  a  more  specific  point  to  be  considered  is 
religious  conversation.  A  man  usually  talks,  it  is 
said,  about  that  which  is  nearest  his  heart;  and  a 
religious  man,  therefore,  will  talk  about  religion. 
Every  observing  person,  we  may  notice  in  passing, 
must  be  aware  that  there  are  many  exceptions  to  this 


178  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

remark;  that  there  are  not  a  few  individuals  in  the 
circle  of  his  acquaintance,  who  are  not,  by  any  means, 
communicative  on  the  subjects  that  must  deeply 
interest  them.  But  there  is  a  still  more  important 
distinction  in  regard  to  the  subject-matter  itself 

It  is  this.  A  man  may  talk  religiously,  and  yet  not 
talk  about  religion,  as  an  abstract  subject.  A  good 
and  devout  man  will  show  that  he  is  such  by  his  con- 
versation ;  but  not  necessarily  by  his  conversing  upon 
the  abstract  subjects  of  devotion  and  goodness.  He 
will  show  it  by  the  spirit  of  his  conversation,  by  the 
cast  and  tone  of  his  sentiments,  on  a  great  many 
subjects.  You  w^ill  see,  as  he  talks  about  men  and 
things,  about  life  and  its  objects,  its  cares,  disappoint- 
ments, afflictions  and  blessings,  about  its  end  and  its 
future  prospects ;  you  will  see  that  his  mind  is  right, 
that  his  affections  are  pure,  that  his  aspirations  are 
spiritual.  You  will  see  this,  not  by  any  particular 
phraseology  he  uses,  not  because  he  has  set  himself  to 
talk  in  any  particular  manner,  not  because  he  intended 
you  should  see  it ;  but  simply  because  conversation  is 
ordinarily  and  naturally  an  expression  and  index  of 
the  character.  I  am  not  denying  that  a  good  man 
may  talk  about  religion  as  an  abstract  subject,  or  about 
religious  experience  as  the  express  subject.  All  may  do 
this,  at  times ;  some,  from  the  habit  of  their  minds, 
may  do  it  often.  But  what  I  say  is,  that  this,  with 
most  men,  is  not  necessaril}-  nor  naturally  the  way  of 
showing  an  interest  in  religion. 

And  to  prove  this,  we  need  only  ask  how  men  ex- 
press, by  conversation,  their  interest  in  other  subjects  ; 
how  they  exhibit  other  parts  of  their  character,  through 
this  medium ;  this  breathing  out  of  the  soul  in  words. 
A  man  talks  affectionately  or  feelingly ;  you  see  that 
this  is  the  tone  of  his  mind ;  you  say  that  he  is  a  per- 


RELIGIOUS  AFFECTIONS.  179 

son  of  great  sensibility;  but  does  he  talk  about 
affection,  or  feeling,  or  sensibility,  in  the  abstract  ?  A 
man  talks  intelligently ;  but  does  he  talks  about  intelli- 
gence ?  Or  is  it  necessary  that  he  should  discourse  a 
great  deal  about  good  sense,  or  be  perpetually  saying 
what  a  fine  thing  knowledge  is,  in  order  to  convince 
you  that  he  is  an  intehigent  man  ?  Here  is  a  circle 
of  persons,  distinguished  for  the  strength  of  their  family 
and  friendly  attachments.  All  their  actions  and  words 
show  that  kindness  and  harmony  dwell  among  them. 
But  now,  w^hat  would  you  think,  if  they  should  often 
sit  down  and  talk  in  set  terms,  about  the  beauty  of 
friendship,  or  the  charms  of  domestic  love  ?  So  strange 
and  unnatural  would  it  be,  that  you  would  be  inchned 
to  suspect  their  sincerity.  You  might,  indeed,  fairly 
infer  one  of  two  things ;  either  that  love  and  friend- 
ship with  them  were  matters  of  mere  and  cold 
sentiment,  or  that  these  persons  had  utterly  mistaken 
the  natural  and  proper  method  of  exhibifing  their 
affections. 

But  there  is  another  kind  of  religious  conversation, 
which,  beyond  all  others,  is  thought  to  furnish  the 
clearest  evidence  of  a  man's  piety ;  and  that  is,  his 
conversing  much  with  thoughtless  or  unregenerate 
persons,  loith  a  vieio  to  making  thein  religious.  Now 
here,  we  are  to  keep  in  view  the  same  distinction,  that 
is  applied  to  religion  in  general.  A  religious  man  may 
well  desire  to  make  others  religious  by  his  conversa- 
tion. He  may,  on  proper  occasions,  converse  with 
them  for  this  very  end.  But  to  do  this,  he  need  not 
talk  about  religion  in  the  abstract,  nor  expressly  about 
the  religious  good  of  the  persons  he  converses  with. 
There  may,  indeed,  be  times  and  relations,  in  which 
this  personal  appeal  should  be  made  ;  but  it  should  not 
be  done  as  a  matter  of  course  and  of  set  form.     A  man 


180  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

may  impress  his  acquaintances  in  this  way,  I  know. 
He  may  make  them  feel  strangely  and  uncomfortably. 
He  may  create  in  them  a  sort  of  preternatural  feeling. 
He  may  awaken,  terrify,  distress  them.  He  may,  then, 
by  such  means,  make  an  impression  upon  them ;  but 
it  w^ill  not  be  a  good  impression.  It  is  planting  in  the 
mind  the  seeds  of  superstition,  which  a  whole  life,  often, 
is  not  sufficient  to  eradicate.  It  is  through  this  process 
that  religion  is,  with  so  many  persons,  a  strange,  uncon- 
genial, terrifying,  distressful,  gloomy  thing,  to  their 
dying  day.  Wh)^  is  it  not  apparent  to  every  one,  that 
this  method  of  proceeding  is  unnatural,  unwise,  inexpe- 
dient ?  It  is  not  with  religion,  that  men  are  impressed 
in  this  case,  so  much  as  with  the  manner  in  which  it 
is  presented,  with  its  aspects  and  adjuncts.  And  there 
is  reason  to  fear  that  with  many,  religion  itself  becomes 
a  thing  of  aspects  and  circumstances,  rather  than  of 
the  spirit ;  that  it  becomes,  in  its  possessor,  a  peculi- 
arity, rather  than  a  character ;  a  posture  and  often  a 
distorted  posture  of  mind  and  feeling,  rather  than  the 
mind  and  feeling  itself  Men  are  not  accustomed  to 
talk  about  abstract  subjects,  nor  about  the  soul,  as  an 
abstract  subject.  And  if  you  approach  them,  awk- 
wardly, as  you  must  do  in  such  a  case,  and  put  such 
questions  as,  "  w^hether  they  have  obtained  religion," 
or,  "  what  is  the  state  of  their  souls,"  they  will  hardly 
know  what  to  do  with  such  treatment ;  they  will  not 
know  how  to  commune  with  you.  They  may,  indeed, 
if  they  have  a  great  respect  for  you,  sit  down,  and  listen 
to  the  awful  communication,  and  be  impressed  and 
overcome  by  it.  But  is  this  the  way  to  exert  a  favour- 
able and  useful  influence  upon  them?  Do  but  con- 
sider if  this  is  the  way  in  which  men  are  favourably 
and  usefully  impressed  on  other  subjects.  A  man 
has  a  quarrel  with  Iris  neighbour.     You  wish  to  dis- 


RELIGIOUS  AFFECTIONS.  181 

pose  him  to  peace  and  reconciliation.  Do  you  begin 
with  asking-  him  what  is  the  state  of  his  soul  ?  Do 
you  ask  him  whether  he  has  obtained  peace  ?  Do  you 
begin  to  talk  with  him  about  the  abstract  doctrines  of 
peace  and  forgiveness  ?  Let  a  sensible  man  be  seen 
communing  with  his  neighbour  in  a  case  like  this,  and 
he  will  be  found  to  adopt  a  far  more  easy,  unembar- 
rassed and  natural  mode  of  communication.  And.  in 
any  case,  whether  you  propose  to  enlighten  the  ignor- 
ant, to  quicken  the  indolent  or  to  restrain  the  passion- 
ate, every  one  must  know,  that  a  course  would  be 
pursued,  very  different  from  that  which  is  usually 
resorted  to,  for  recommending  religion. 

I  have  now  spoken  of  the  general  manners,  and  of 
conversation  in  particular,  as  modes  of  exhibiting 
religion. 

But  on  the  general  subject  of  exhibiting  religion, 

I  have  one  observation  to  offer  in  close.    I  have  spoken, 

in  thi^  discourse,  of  exhibiting  or  manifesting  religion, 

because  I  could  find  no  other  brief  and  comprehensive 

phrase  which  would  convey  the  idea ;  but  I  am  afraid 

that  these  phrases  themselves  are  liable  to  carry  with 

them  an  erroneous  idea.     If  a  man  of  high  intelligence 

or  cultivated  taste  should  think  much  of  exhibiting  his 

intelligence  or  taste,  we  should  say  that  he  is  not  very 

wisely  employed.     He  might,    indeed,  very   properly 

think  of  it,  if  he  had  fallen  into  any  great  faults  on 

this  point.     But  after  all,  exhibition  is  not  the  thing. 

And  the  observation,  therefore,  which  I  have  to  make, 

is  this;  that  the   more  a  man  thinks  of  cultivating 

rehgion,   and  the  less  he  thinks  of  exhibiting  it,  the 

more  happy  will  he  be  in  himself,  and  the  more  useful 

to  others.     That  which  is  within  us,  it  has  been  said, 

"will  out."     Let  a  man  possess  the  spirit  of  rehgion, 

and  it  will  probably,  in  some  way  or  other,  manifest 

16 


182  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

itself.  He  need  not  be  anxious  on  that  point.  On  the 
contrary,  there  are  no  persons  who  are  more  disagree- 
able ;  there  are  scarcely  any  who  do  a  greater 
disservice  to  the  cause  of  virtue,  than  pattern  men 
and  women.  Hence  it  is  that  you  often  hear  it  said, 
"We  cannot  endure  perfect  people."  The  assumption, 
the  consciousness  of  virtue,  is  the  most  fatal  blight 
upon  all  its  charms.  Good  examples  are  good  things ; 
but  their  goodness  is  gone  the  moment  they  are 
adopted  for  their  own  sake.  A  noble  action  performed 
for  example's  sake,  is  a  contradiction  in  terms.  Let  it 
be  performed  in  total  unconsciousness  of  anything  but 
the  action  itself,  and  then,  and  then  only,  is  it  clothed 
with  power  and  beauty. 

I  do  not  mean  to  dissuade  any  good  man  from 
acting  and  speaking  for  the  religious  enlightenment 
and  edification  of  others;  I  advocate  it;  but  that  is 
effort,  not  exhibition.  Yet  even  then,  I  would  say,  let 
no  man's  religious  action  or  speech  go  beyond  the 
impulses  of  his  heart.  Let  no  man  be  more  religious 
in  his  conversation,  than  he  is  in  his  character.  The 
worst  speculative  evils  in  the  popular  mind  about 
rehgion,  I  fear,  are  the  mingled  sense  of  its  unreality, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  of  its  burthensomeness  on  the 
other,  which  spring  from  the  artificial  treatment  it  has 
received  from  its  professed  votaries.  Away  with  set 
phrases,  and  common-places,  and  monotones,  and 
drawlings,  and  all  solemn  dulness;  and  let  us  have 
truth,  simplicity  and  power !  The  heart  of  the  world 
will  answer  to  that  call,  even  as  the  forests  answer  and 
bend  to  the  free  winds  of  heaven ;  while  amidst  the 
fogs  and  vapours  that  rise  from  stagnant  waters,  it 
stands  motionless,  chilled  and  desolate. 


IV. 

CAUSES    OF     INDIFFERENCE    AND    AVERSION   TO 
RELIGION. 

For  the  children  of  this  world  are  in  their  generation  wiser  than 
the  children  of  light. — Luke  xvi.  8. 

I  AM  to  speak  in  this  discourse  of  the  causes  of 
indifference  and  aversion  to  rehgion ;  and  my  special 
purpose,  in  the  analogy  which  I  am  following  out  in 
these  discussions  is,  to  inquire,  whether  the  same 
causes  would  not  make  men  indifferent  or  averse  to 
any  other  subject,  however  naturally  agreeable  or 
interesting  to  them.  Let  philosophy,  or  friendship,  or 
native  sensibility ;  let  study,  or  business,  or  pleasure 
even,  be  inculcated  and  treated  as  religion  has  been, 
and  would  not  men  be  averse  to  them  ? 

It  is  possible  that  I  have  a  hearer  who  will  think 
that  he  solves  the  problem  by  saying,  that  men's 
aversion  to  religion  is  owing  to  the  wickedness  of  their 
hearts.  That  would  be  to  solve  a  problem  with  a 
truism.  The  aversion  to  religion  is  wickedness  of 
heart.  I  am  sensible,  and  it  will  be  more  apparent  as 
we  proceed,  that  this  is  to  be  said  with  important 
qualifications.  Bat  still  it  is  true  that  this  state  of 
mind  is  wrong.  And  the  question  is,  why  does  this 
wrong  state  of  mind  exist?  In  other  words,  whence 
is  this  aversion  to  religion?  It  may  be  said,  with  more 
pertinence  I  allow,  that  the  cause  is  to  be  found  in  the 
depravity  of  human  nature.  This  is,  indeed,  assigning 
a  cause.     And  it  is,  moreover,  bringing  the  subject  to 


184  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

a  point,  on  which  I  wish  to  fix  your  attention.  For  so 
far  from  admitting  this  to  be  true,  I  think  it  will  be 
easy  to  show  that  men  may  be  made,  and  are  made, 
indifferent  or  averse  to  worldly  objects,  to  objects 
allowed  to  be  congenial  to  their  nature,  by  the  same 
causes  which  make  them  indifferent  or  averse  to 
heavenly  objects,  the  objects  of  faith  and  duty. 

I.  The  first  cause  which  I  shall  mention  is  neglect. 
There  are  many  sciences  and  arts  and  accomplish- 
ments, which  are  most  interesting,  and  naturally  most 
interesting  to  those  who  cultivate  them,  but  entirely 
indifferent  to  those  who  neglect  them.  We  see  this 
every  day.  We  find  different  men  in  the  opposite 
poles  of  enthusiasm  and  apathy,  on  certain  subjects ; 
and  the  reason  is,  that  some  have  been  familiar  with 
them,  and  others  have  been  completely  estranged  from 
them.  The  most  interesting  and  fascinating  reading 
has  no  attraction  for  those,  who  have  passed  the  most 
of  their  lives  without  ever  taking  up  a  book.  It  is,  in 
short,  a  well-known  law  of  our  minds,  that  attention  is 
necessary  to  give  vividness  and  interest  to  objects  of 
human  thought. 

The  first  cause  of  indifference  to  religion,  then,  is 
neglect.  It  may  be  said  that  all  are  taught ;  that  the 
subject  is  constantly  urged  upon  their  attention  from 
the  pulpit.  But  the  example  and  daily  conversation 
of  their  parents  and  friends,  who  have  showed  no  in- 
terest in  religion,  have  been  more  powerful  far  than 
the  words  of  the  preacher.  The  real  and  effective  in- 
fluences of  their  education  have  all  tended  to  neglect. 
The  actual  course  of  their  conduct  has  come  to  the 
same  thing.  They  have  never  attended  to  religion, 
either  as  the  merchant  attends  to  business,  or  as  the 
farmer  attends  to  soils,  or  the  mechanician  to  his  art, 
or,  to  come  nearer  to  the  point,  as  the  student  attends 


INDIFFERENCE    AND    AVERSION.  185 

to  philosophy,  or  as  the  virtuoso  to  matters  of  taste,  or 
even  as  the  sketching  traveller  attends  to  scenery,  or 
as  the  man  of  pleasure  to  amusement ;  or,  in  fine,  as 
any  man  attends  to  anything  in  which  he  would  be 
interested.  It  is  not  in  this  way,  at  all,  that  they  have 
thought  of  being  religious,  but  in  some  more  summary, 
in  some  extraordinary  way :  and  multitudes,  who 
would  think  it  preposterous  to  expect  to  be  interested 
in  a  literature  or  language,  of  which  they  have  never 
read  anything,  have  never  in  their  lives  attentively 
read  one  book  about  religion,  not  even  the  Bible. 

I  am  quite  sensible,  while  I  make  these  compari- 
sons, that  there  is  a  general  attention  to  religion  more 
important  than  any  specific  study  of  it :  an  attention, 
that  is  to  say,  to  the  monitions  of  conscience,  to  experi- 
ence, to  the  intimations  of  a  providence  all  around  us, 
to  the  great  example  of  Christ  that  ever  shines  as  a 
light  before  us.  But  it  is  this  very  attention,  as  well 
as  the  specific  study,  in  which  men  have  been  deficient. 
And  then,  as  to  the  specific  study,  I  say,  it  is  to  be  ad- 
vocated on  grounds  similar  to  those  which  recommend 
it  in  every  other  case.  A  man  may  be  religious  with- 
out reading  books,  I  know^  So  may  he  be  an  agricul- 
turalist or  mechanician  without  reading  books.  But 
the  point  to  be  stated,  for  him  who  reads  at  all,  is  that 
he  will  read  on  the  subject  on  which  he  wishes  to  be 
informed  and  interested  ;  and  so  we  may  say,  that  he, 
who  studies  at  all,  will  study  on  the  subject  that  is 
nearest  his  heart ;  and  that  he,  who  adopts  forms  and 
usages  in  any  case,  will  avail  himself  of  forms  and 
usages  in  this.  So  that  he,  into  whose  life  no  specific 
religious  action  enters,  gives  no  evidence  of  general 
attention. 

Still,  then,  I  repeat,  there  must  be  attention,  both 
general    and    particular.     No  man   can    reasonably 


186  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

expect  to  be  religious  without  it.  It  is  not  enough  pas- 
sively to  be  borne  on  with  the  wave  of  Avoiidly  fashion, 
now  setting  towards  the  church,  and  now  towards  the 
exchange,  and  now  towards  the  theatre.  It  is  not 
enough  to  be  as  rehgious  as  chance  and  time  and  tide 
will  make  us.  There  must  be  a  distinct,  direct  reli- 
gious action,  a  hand  stretched  out,  an  eye  looking 
beyond,  a  heart  breathing  its  sighs  and  secret  prayers 
for  some  better  thing.  But  with  multitudes  this  dis- 
tinct action  of  the  soul  has  never  been  put  forth.  And 
it  is  no  more  surprising  that  they  are  not  Christians, 
than  it  is  that  they  are  not  astronomers  or  artists. 

n.  The  next  cause  of  indifference  and  aversion  to 
religion  is  to  be  found  in  the  character,  with  which 
some  of  its  most  attractive  virtues  are  commonly 
invested.  Let  us  consider  a  few  of  these,  and  compare 
them  with  other  affections  and  sentiments. 

One  of  the  Christian  virtues,  much  insisted  on,  is 
love  of  the  brethren.  The  analogous  sentiment  is 
friendship.  Now  I  ask,  would  friendship  be  the  attrac- 
tive quality  that  it  is,  if  it  were  inculcated  and  repre- 
sented in  the  same  way  as  love  of  the  brethren  ?  If 
friendship  were  constantly  insisted  on,  as  a  test  of 
character,  as  the  trying  point  on  which  all  future 
hopes  rest ;  if  a  man  were  constantly  asked  whether 
he  loves  his  friends,  in  the  same  way  in  which  he  is 
asked  whether  he  loves  the  brethren,  and  thus  were 
made  to  tremble  when  that  question  is  asked  ;  if,  then, 
the  affection  of  friendship  Avere  required  to  be  exercised 
with  so  little  reference  to  all  the  natural  charms  and 
winning  graces  of  character  ;  if,  again,  friendship  must 
find  its  objects  within  a  sphere  so  limited,  among  men 
of  a  particular  sect,  or  among  church-members  only, 
or  among  speculative  believers  of  a  certain  cast ;  and 
if,  moreover,  friendship  were  to  express  itself  by  such 


INDIFFERENCE    AND    AVERSION.  187 

methods  as  brotherly  love  usually  does,  by  set  and 
precise  manners,  by  peculiar  actions,  by  talking  of  its 
elect  and  chosen  ones,  as  Christians  have  been  wont 
to  talk  of  each  other  :  if,  I  say,  all  this  belonged  to 
friendship,  do  you  think  it  would  wear  to  men's  eyes 
the  charm  and  fascination  that  it  now  does  ?  Would 
they  rush  to  its  arms  ;  would  they  seek  it,  and  sigh  for 
it,  as  they  now  do  ?  No ;  friendship  itself  would  lose 
its  grace  and  beauty,  if  it  were  set  forth  as  the  love  of 
the  brethren  usually  is.  No  wonder  that  men  are 
averse  to  such  an  affection.  But  would  they  have  been 
equally  averse  to  it,  if  it  had  been  represented  as  but 
a  holier  friendship  ;  the  friendship  of  good  men  ;  which 
it  is,  and  which  is  all  that  it  is  ? 

Again  ;  hope  is  a  Christian  virtue.  It  is  also  natural 
affection  ;  and  as  a  natural  affection,  it  attracts  every 
humaij  heart.  It  "springs  eternal"  and  irresistible 
in  every  human  breast.  Its  eye  kindles,  and  its  coun- 
tenance glows,  as  it  gazes  upon  the  bright  future.  But 
would  it  be  this  involuntary  and  welcome  affection,  if 
it  bore  the  character  that  evangelical  hope  has  assumed, 
in  the  experience  of  modern  Christians?  I  say  of 
modern  Christians ;  for  the  ancient  hope  was  a  different 
thing.  It  was  the  hope  of  those  "  who  sat  in  the  region 
and  shadow  of  death,"  that  they  should  live  hereafter: 
it  Vv^as  a  hope  full  of  immortality  ;  full  of  the  sublimity 
and  joy  of  that  great  expectation.  But  now,  what  is 
the  modern  feeling  that  bears  this  name,  and  how 
does  it  express  itself?  It  says  with  anxiety,  and  often 
w4th  a  mournful  sigh,  "  I  hope  that  I  am  a  Christian ; 
I  hope  that  I  am  pardoned  ;  I  hope  that  I  shall  go  to 
heaven."  Would  any  human  hope  be  attractive,  if 
this  were  its  character  ?  Is  it  strange  that  men  do  not 
desire  to  entertain  a  hope,  that  is  so  expressed? 

Once  more ;  faith  holds  a  prominent  place  among 


188  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

the  Christian  virtues.  In  its  natural  form,  it  is  one 
of  the  most  grateful  of  all  affections.  Confidence ; 
confidence  in  our  friend ;  what  earthly  repose  is 
equal  to  this?  The  faith  of  a  child  in  its  parent; 
how  simple,  natural,  irresistible  !  And  how  perfectly- 
intelligible  is  all  this !  But  now  do  you  throw  one 
shade  of  mystery  over  this  affection ;  require  it  to 
assent  to  abstruse  and  unintelligible  doctrines  ;  require 
of  it  a  metaphysical  accuracy  ;  demand  it,  not  as  the 
natural,  but  as  some  technical  or  mystical  condition 
of  parental  favour ;  resolve  all  this  into  some  peculiar 
and  ill-understood  connexion  with  the  laws  of  the 
divine  government ;  and  the  friend,  the  child  would 
shrink  from  it ;  he  would  forego  the  natural  affections 
of  his  heart,  if  they  must  be  bound  up  with  things  so 
repulsive  and  chilling  to  all  its  confiding  and  joyous 
sensibilities. 

I  may  observe  here,  that  these  three  virtues, 
brotherly  love,  hope,  and  faith,  derive  from  the  circum- 
stances of  the  early  age  a  prominence  and  a  peculiarity, 
which  ought  since  to  have  passed  away.  When  the 
Christians  were  a  comparatively  small  and  persecuted 
band,  and  had  a  great  cause  committed  to  their  fidelity, 
it  was  natural  and  proper  that  the  tie  between  them 
should  be  peculiar.  Hence  their  letters  to  one  another 
were  constantly  filled  with  such  expressions  as,  "  Sa- 
lute the  brethren,"  "Greet  the  brethren."  Those 
brethren  were  perhaps  one  hundred  or  five  hundred 
persons  in  a  city ;  known  and  marked  adherents  of 
the  new  faith ;  who  met  together  in  dark  retreats,  in 
old  ruins,  in  caves  or  catacombs.  But  all  this  has 
passed  away.  And  now  it  would  be  absurd  for  a  man, 
however  affectionately  and  religiously  disposed,  in 
writing  letters  to  any  town  or  city,  to  send  salutations 
and  greetings  to  all  the  good  people  in  those  places* 


INDIFFERENCE    AND    AVERSION,  189 

Christians  now  stand  in  the  general  relation  to  one 
another  of  good  men  ;  not  of  fellow-sufferers,  not  of 
fellow-champions  of  a  persecuted  cause.  It  is  precisely 
the  difference  between  compatriots  fighting  for  their 
liberty,  and  fellow-citizens  quietly  enjoying  it. 

In  like  manner,  Christian  faith,  when  it  was  neces- 
sarily the  first  step  in  religion,  when  it  came  to  fill  the 
void  of  skepticism  ;  and  Christian  hope,  when  it  sprung 
fi'om  the  dark  cloud  of  despair,  both  derived  from  the 
circumstances  a  singular  character  and  a  signal  im- 
portance. And  the  circumstances  justified  a  peculiar 
manner  of  speaking  about  them.  Hope  was  indeed  a 
glorious  badge  of  distinction  in  a  world  without  hope  : 
and  faith  was,  indeed,  a  pledge  for  the  highest  virtue, 
when  it  might  cost  its  possessor  his  life.  But  iioiv  to 
speak  of  faith  and  hope  wdth  a  certain  mysterious 
sense  of  their  importance,  is  to  present  them  in  a  false 
garb  ;  it  is  to  clothe,  with  an  ancient  and  strange  cos- 
tume, things  that  ought  to  be  famihar ;  and  it  is 
therefore  to  cut  them  off  from  our  natural  sympathy 
and  attachment. 

III.  The  third  cause  of  indifference  and  aversion  to 
religion,  and  the  last  which  I  shall  mention,  but  on 
which  I  shall  dwell  at  greater  length  than  I  have 
upon  the  former,  is  to  be  found  in  the  mode  of  its 
inculcation. 

To  show  that  men  may  be  made  averse  to  objects 
naturally  and  confessedly  interesting  to  them,  by  an 
unfortunate  teaching,  and  to  point  out  the  manner  of 
that  teaching,  I  shall  draw  two  illustrations  from  the 
pursuit  of  knowledge. 

It  will  not  be  denied,  that  for  knowledge  in  general 
the  human  mind  has  a  natural  aptitude  and  desire. 
But  do  the  children,  in  the  most  of  our  schools,  love  the 
knowledge  that  is  inculcated  there  ?     Have  they  as- 


190  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

sociated  agreeable  ideas  with  their  class-books  and 
school-rooms,  and  with  the  time  they  pass  in  them  ? 
What  is  the  occasion  of  this  insufferable  tediousness 
that  so  many  of  them  experience,  in  the  pursuits  of 
elementary  learning?  How  is  it,  that  they  so  often 
find  the  form,  on  Avhich  they  sit,  an  almost  literal 
rack  of  torture  ;  and  the  hours  of  confinement  length- 
ening out  like  the  hours  of  bondage  ?  Do  we  talk  of 
men's  aversion  to  religion  ?  Why,  here  is  aversion  to 
knowledge,  as  strong  and  obstinate,  as  that  of  hardened 
vice  itself  to  religion.  What  causes  it?  Not  that 
nature,  which  was  as  truly  made  to  love  knowledge, 
as  appetite  to  love  food ;  but  circumstances  have 
disappointed  the  natural  want,  till  it  is  perverted  and 
stupified,  so  that  it  scarcely  appears  to  belong  to  the 
nature  of  the  human  being. 

Again  ;  the  science  of  astronomy  is  held,  by  all  who 
understand  it,  to  be  a  most  interesting,  an  almost 
enchanting  science.  No  one  can  doubt  that,  if  properly 
introduced  to  the  mind,  it  would  prove  extremely 
attractive  and  delightful.  Nor  let  it  be  said,  to  destroy 
the  parallel  which  I  am  exhibiting,  that  knowledge 
has  no  natural  obstacles  in  the  mind  to  contend  with, 
while  religion  has  many.  Religion  finds  obstructions, 
indeed,  in  human  nature;  but  so  also  has  knowledge 
to  contend  with  the  love  of  ease,  with  sloth,  with 
physical  dulness,  with  pleasure  and  worldly  vanity. 

Now  suppose  that  the  teacher  of  astronomy  comes 
forward  to  instruct  his  pupil;  and  that  he  at  once 
adopts  a  very  unusual,  very  formal  and  repulsive 
manner ;  that  he  tells  him  with  reiterated  assurance 
that  he  rnust  learn  this  science,  and  yet  fails  to  show 
any  very  perceptible  connexion  it  has  with  his  interest, 
his  dignity  or  happiness.  Suppose  further,  that  the 
teacher  informs  his  pupil,  that  he  has  the  strongest 


INDIFFERENCE  AND  AVERSION.  191 

natural  aversion  to  the  science  in  question ;  that  this 
aversion  is  so  strong  as  to  amount  to  an  actual  inability 
to  comprehend  it ;  that  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  he 
never  will  learn  it  of  himself ;  that  his  only  chance  of 
success  Ues  in  the  interposition  of  divine  power;  that 
all  his  exertions  to  learn  give  him  no  claim  to  under- 
stand what  he  is  inquiring  after;  that  if  he  succeeds, 
it  will  be  no  merit  of  his,  and  that  if  he  fails  he  will  be 
utterly  ruined,  and  for  ever  miserable,  and  will  richly 
deserve  to  be  so.  Suppose,  I  say,  all  these  influences 
to  attach  themselves  to  one  of  the  most  beautiful 
science  ever  commended  to  the  human  mind;  suppose 
all  the  strange  instructions,  the  fearful  agitations,  the 
tremendous  excitements  of  hope  and  fear,  the  unnatural 
postures  of  mind,  the  violence  to  reason,  the  mocking 
of  eflfbrt,  the  mysteries  of  faith  and  the  extravagances 
of  conduct,  that  must  arise  from  so  extraordinary  an 
intellectual  condition  of  things;  and  do  you  believe 
that  any  object  or  pursuit  would  be  likely  to  be  loved 
in  such  circumstances?  Would  you  say,  in  such  a 
case,  that  the  science  in  question  had  any  fair  chance 
or  trial? 

But  let  us  now  come  to  the  direct  teaching  of  religion 
itself.  What  are  the  causes  that  prevent  its  grateful 
and  hearty  acceptance?  What  are  the  causes,  I 
mean,  which  exist  in  the  teaching  itself;  for  I  am  not, 
at  present,  concerned  with  those  which  exist  in  the 
perverseness  of  the  human  will.  To  this  question,  I 
shall  answer,  that  the  teaching  is  apt  to  be  too  formal, 
too  direct,  and  too  abstract. 

First,  it  is  apt  to  be  too  formal.  The  parent,  the 
teacher,  the  friend,  does  not  neglect  the  subject, 
perhaps,  nor  does  he  misconceive  it;  his  views  are 
rational  and  just;  he  sees  what  religion  is,  and  would 
teach  it ;  but  how  does  he  teach  it  ?     Himself,  perhaps, 


192  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

possessing  but  little  of  holy  familiarity  with  its  objects, 
he  speaks  to  his  child  or  his  pupil,  with  a  constrained 
manner,  speaks,  as  if  he  were  set  to  do  it,  and  as  if  it 
were  a  task.  He  feels  the  duty  of  imbuing  with 
religious  sentiment  the  mind  that  is  committed  to  him ; 
but  the  gentle  and  holy  voice  is  not  in  his  own  heart, 
and  without  intending  it,  he  adopts  an  artificial  tone. 
He  speaks  on  this  subject  as  he  speaks  on  no  other. 
His  words  want  all  the  winning  grace  and  charm  of 
natural  sensibility.  In  short,  he  is  a  formalist  in 
religion,  and  a  formalist  in  teaching  it.  Formal  as  all 
other  kinds  of  education  have  been,  none  has  been  so 
dreadfully  smitten  with  this  taint,  as  catechising,  and 
the  inculcation  of  Bible  lessons,  and  the  teaching  of 
prayers,  and  talking  of  God. 

Now,  everything  unnatural  in  manner  is  repulsive 
to  us.  It  is  scarce  speaking  too  strongly,  to  say,  that 
we  hate  it.  We  fly  from  it  when  we  are  children ;  we 
revolt  from  it  when  we  are  men.  There  is  nothing  in 
social  manners  that  is  more  intolerable  than  affectation. 
But  especially,  I  think,  is  it  the  instinct  of  children  to 
shrink  from  everything  formal  in  manner.  Their 
minds  put  forth  every  power  of  resistance  to  it,  as 
their  limbs  would  resist  the  compression  of  some 
torturing  instrument.  Might  religion  but  have  come 
forth  from  all  its  artificial  peculiarities  and  forms  of 
singularity  and  fetters  of  restraint;  might  it  have 
talked  with  us  as  other  things  talk  with  us ;  might  it 
only  have  won  us,  as  kindness,  friendship,  love  win  us ; 
how  different  would  now  have  been  the  state  of  religious 
sentiment  and  affection,  in  the  hearts  of  thousands 
around  us ! 

I  am  speaking  of  direct  influences;  and  I  now  add, 
that  they  may  be  too  direct  for  the  best  impression. 
Perhaps,  indeed,  it  is  one  of  the  inevitable  errors  of 


INDIFFERENCE  AND  AVERSION.  193 

the  formalist,  to  make  them  so.  He,  who  is  not  heartily 
and  wholly  interested  in  religion,  will  be  very  apt  to 
make  the  inculcation  of  it  a  set  business ;  and  then  it 
certainly  will  be  too  direct.  It  will  take  the  form  of 
direct  command,  and  say,  "  You  must  do  this  or  that ; 
you  must  love  God ;"  rather  than  express  itself  in  easy 
and  unrestrained  and  unpremeditated  conversation.  I 
am  inclined,  indeed,  to  say  that,  in  general,  the 
strongest  feelings  choose  indirect  modes  of  manifesta- 
tion. I  remember  once  to  have  heard  of  a  prayer  on 
a  very  affecting  occasion,  and  where  the  speaker  was 
most  of  all  interested,  in  which  it  was  said,  that  every 
word  bore  reference  to  the  occasion,  and,  yet  the  occa- 
sion was  never  once  directl}'^  alluded  to.  I  confess  that 
that  appeared  to  me,  as  the  very  highest  description 
that  could  be  given,  of  delicate  and  strong  sensibility. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  be  direct  in  order  to  be  impressive ; 
the  very  contrary  is  more  apt  to  be  true.  And  he  who 
can  think  of  no  way  to  impress  religion,  but  broad, 
open-mouthed  and  urgent  exhortation  or  entreaty, 
understands  neither  religion  nor  human  nature. 

The  common  fault  of  parents  certainly  is,  to  do  too 
little ;  but  there  are  ways  in  which  they  may  do  too 
much.  It  has  been  justly  said  that  nothing  can  be 
worse,  than  to  be  always  pointing  out  the  'moral  of  a 
story  to  children.  They  do  it  for  themselves  ;  and  for 
another  to  do  it  for  them,  after  they  have  done  it,  is 
often  felt  by  them  to  be  degrading  and  irritating.  I 
think  that  some  of  the  worst  children  and  young- 
people,  that  I  have  ever  kown,  are  those,  into  whose 
ears  moralities  and  fine  sentiments  have  been  for 
ever  dinned  with  wearisome  repetition  and  minute- 
ness. This  accounts  for  the  false  maxim  which  you 
sometimes  hear,  that  the  best  parents  often  have  the 
worst  children.  Such  parents,  I  know,  are  often  what 
17 


194  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

are  called  very  good  people,  very  exemplary  persons ; 
extremely  anxious,  they  are  said  to  be,  for  the  improve- 
ment of  their  children ;  and  so  they  are  in  a  sense  ; 
and  yet  I  have  been  sometimes  tempted  to  say,  that 
heartless,  formal,  wearisome  domestic  lectures  on 
religion  and  virtue,  do  more  hurt  than  any  people  in 
the  world.  The  worst  and  most  abandoned  of  men 
make  vice  odious ;  the]/  make  virtue  so.  And  the 
feelings  of  the  children,  bad  and  insensible  as  they  are 
apt  to  become,  do  really  evince,  though  unhappily,  the 
dignity  of  human  nature ;  they  show  that  virtue  was 
not  designed  to  be  poured  into  the  ear  in  dinning 
precepts  or  dull  complaints,  but  to  be  the  offspring  of 
an  inward  energy,  self-wrought,  self-chosen ;  influenced, 
indeed,  by  arguments  from  without,  but  drawing  its 
own  inference,  bringing  out,  from  communion  with 
itself  and  with  the  spirit  of  God,  its  own  free  and 
glorious  result. 

I  shall  not  be  thought,  certainly,  in  these  remarks, 
to  oppose  the  religious  education  of  children.  I  am 
speaking  of  the  form  of  teaching,  and  not  of  the  fact. 
The  only  question  is  about  the  best  mode  ;  and  into 
this,  I  maintain,  that  less  of  direct  inculcation  and 
more  of  indirect  influence,  should  enter,  than  is  com- 
mon. Nay,  I  maintain  that  the  stern  and  solemn 
enforcement  of  lessons  and  readings  has  effectually 
alienated  many  from  religion.  It  was  the  manner,  I 
repeat,  rather  than  the  act.  The  Bible  may  certainly 
be  taught,  and  catechisms  may  be  taught  in  the  form 
of  direct  lessons  ;  they  may  be  successfully  taught,  if 
the  manner  be  easy  and  kindly ;  and,  I  think,  that 
Sunday  schools,  where  a  large  company  of  children 
are  brought  together,  and  the  free  and  joyous  spirit 
of  childhood  pervades  the  place,  are  likely  to  give 
freedom  and  ease  to  the  manner  of  teaching.     Religi- 


INDIFFERENCE  AND  AVERSION.  195 

ous  teaching  is  thus  becoming  Hke  common-school 
teaching,  and  on  this  account,  is  doubtless  exposed  to 
some  dangers  ;  but  it  is  Hkely  to  have  the  advantage 
of  throwing  off  the  usual  manner  of  direct,  peculiar, 
superstitious  appeal  to  the  heart,  singling  out  its 
object,  and  fixing  upon  it  the  eye  of  authority  and 
warning.  So  important  and  critical  is  this  point  of 
manner,  that  a  visible  and  painful  anxiety  to  have  a 
child  excel  in  anything,  even  in  virtue,  does  not  appear 
to  me  to  be  wise  ;  to  urge  even  this,  by  constant  hints 
and  exhortations,  and  especially  with  an  air  of  dissatis- 
faction and  complaint,  is  not  expedient.  The  human 
affections  are  not  to  be  won  in  this  way.  They  are 
not  so  won  to  other  objects ;  why  should  we  expect 
them  by  such  means  to  be  attracted  to  religion  ? 

Finally,  as  we  teach  religion  too  formally,  and  often 
too  directly,  so  do  I  think  that  we  teach  it  too  abstractly. 
There  is  one  particular  affection  on  which  I  shall  bring 
this  observation  to  bear,  and  that  is  the  love  we  should 
cherish  towards  our  Creator.  To  this  sentiment,  I 
allow  that  there  are  some  natural  obstacles.  They 
are  found  in  the  invisibility  and  infinity  of  the  divine 
nature.  These  obstacles,  I  think,  however,  are 
exaggerated;  and  they  are,  by  no  means,  so  great 
as  those  which  are  created  by  our  own  mistakes. 

When  children  are  acquiring  their  first  ideas  of  God 
and  of  their  duty  to  him,  I  apprehend  that  many  things 
are  taught  and  told  them,  Avhich,  although  true  and 
right  in  themselves,  are  inculcated  too  abstractly ;  that 
is,  too  little  with  reference  to  the  minds  that  are  to 
receive  them.  The  parent  teaches  his  child,  as  the 
first  thing,  perhaps,  that  God  sees  him  continually,  in 
the  darkness  and  in  the  lio^ht ;  and  the  thought  of  that 
awful  eye  fixed  upon  him,  distresses  and  frightens  him. 
Or  the  child  is  taught  with  too  little  explanation,  that 


196  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

God  is  displeased,  is  angry  with  him,  when  he  does 
wrong ;  and  how  Uttle  does  he  understand  the  con- 
siderate and  compassionate  displeasure  of  his  Creator ! 
Or  he  is  taught  to  pray,  and  obliged  to  go  through 
with  that  formal  action,  without  its  being  made  a 
sufficiently  sincere,  grateful  and  real  homage.  And 
he  is  especially  taught  all  this  on  Sunday.  Sunday, 
he  is  told,  is  the  Lord's  day.  And  it  is  made  to  him, 
perhaps,  the  most  disagreeable  day  in  the  week. 
Alas!  how  far  does  the  experience  of  those  tedious 
hours,  penetrate  into  his  life,  and  into  the  whole 
religious  complexion  of  his  being  !  How  often  is  that 
hurtful  influence  reasoned  away,  and  how  often  does 
it  come  back  again,  and  disturb,  perhaps,  the  most 
rational  Christian,  even  on  his  dying  bed ! 

The  first  idea,  it  should  be  remembered,  which  a 
cliild  can  gain  at  all,  of  moral  qualities,  is  from  the 
experience  of  his  own  heart.  That  is  the  undoubted, 
and  now  conceded  philosophical  truth.  There^  then, 
should  begin  the  child's  idea  of  God.  From  the  love 
within  him,  he  should  be  taught  that  God  loves  all 
beings.  And  so,  from  tlie  moral  approbation  or 
displeasure  he  feels  in  himself,  he  should  be  taught 
how  God  approves  the  good  and  condemns  the  bad. 
Next,  his  parent  should  be  to  him  the  image  of  God ; 
and  from  his  love  of  that  parent,  and  from  all  that 
parent  has  done  for  hhn,  he  should  be  led  to  consider 
how  easy,  and  how  reasonable  it  is,  that  he  should 
love  God.  God  should  be  made  a  present  being  to 
him,  near  and  kind,  and  not  the  image  of  a  being,  a 
monarch,  or  a  master,  seated  on  a  throne,  in  the  far 
distant  heavens. 

The  common  method  of  teaching,  I  fear,  instead  of 
this,  is  extremely  artificial,  technical  and  constrained, 
and  very  little  adapted  to  make  any  clear  or  agreeable 


INDIFFERENCE    AND    AVERSION.  197 

impression.  And  I  am  persuaded,  that  the  same 
method  adopted  in  regard  to  an  earthly  parent,  would 
powerfully  tend  to  repress  the  filial  sentiment  towards 
him. 

Let  me  dwell  upon  the  comparison  a  moment,  and 
with  a  view  to  illustrate  the  three  faults  of  inculcation 
on  which  I  have  now  been  insisting.  In  order  to  make 
the  cases,  as  far  as  may  be,  parallel,  we  must  suppose 
the  parent  to  be  absent  from  his  child,  absent,  let  it  be 
imagined,  in  a  foreign  country,  and  his  child  has  never 
seen  him.     And  now  my  supposition  proceeds. 

The  child  is  told  of  his  parent.     But  how  told?     I 
will  suppose  it  to  be,  with  a  manner  always  strange 
and  constrained,  with  a  countenance  mysterious  and 
forbidding,  with  a  tone  unusual  and  awful.     Instead 
of  being  taught  to  lisp  amidst  his  innocent  prattlings, 
the  name  of  father,  to  speak  of  that  name  as  if  there 
were  a  charm  about  it,  to  associate  with  the  idea  of 
that  father,  all  brightness,  benignity  and  love ;  instead 
of  all  this  ease,  simplicity  and  tenderness,  he  is  called 
away  from  his  sports  and  pleasures,  is  made  to  stand 
erect  and  attentive,  and  then  he  is  told  of  this  father. 
He  is  told,  indeed,  that  his  father  is  good  and  loves 
him ;  but  the  words  fall  lightly  on  his  ear  ;  they  make 
little  or  no  impression  on  his  mind;  while  the  manner, 
the  countenance,  the  tone,  sink  into  his  heart,  and  tell 
him    far   more  effectually,    that   there    is    something 
strange  and  stern  about  this  father,  and  that  he  cannot 
love  such  a  being.     Yet  this  is  the  very  thing  on  which 
the  main  stress  is  laid.     He  is  told  that  he  must  love 
his  parent.     He  is  constantly  urged  and  commanded 
to  love  him.     He  is  warned  continually  that  his  father 
will  be  very  much  displeased,  if  he  does  not  love  him. 
He  is  admonished  that  all  the  good  things  he  enjoys 
were  sent  to  him  by  his  father;  and  he  is  exhorted  to 
17* 


198  THE    ANALOGY    OF    RELIGION. 

be  grateful.  Besides,  he  is  shown  a  book,  a  fearful 
book,  of  laws,  which  this  parent  has  written  for  him 
to  obey.  And  to  complete  this  system  of  influences, 
he  has  it  continually  held  up  before  him,  that,  ere  long, 
his  father  will  send  for  him,  and  if  he  should  find  a 
defect  of  duty,  gratitude  and  love,  he  will  cast  him  into 
a  dismal  prison,  where  he  will  be  doomed  to  pass  his 
whole  remaining  life  in  misery  and  despair  ! 

I  need  not  point  out  the  moral  of  this  comparison. 
Alas !  how  many  extraneous  causes  have  there  been 
to  sever  the  heart  from  its  great  native  trust ;  the  trust 
in  an  Infinite  Parent !  I  say  not  this,  to  reproach  any 
man,  or  any  body  of  men.  In  this  matter,  I  fear  that 
we  have  all  gone  out  of  the  way.  I  lament  the  defects 
of  every  kind  of  religious  education  and  influence  with 
which  I  am  acquainted,  and  am  persuaded  that  they 
have  done  much  to  spread  around  us  the  prevailing 
indiflference  and  aversion  to  the  most  vital  and  vast  of 
all  concerns.  I  do  not  reproach  my  religious  brethren 
then,  who,  with  myself,  I  ought  to  believe,  have  meant 
well  and  erred  in  honesty,  and  whose  attention  I  would 
invite,  as  I  have  given  my  own,  to  a  serious  considera- 
tion of  this  subject. 

But  I  cannot  leave  the  subject,  without  addressing 
one  emphatic  remonstrance  to  those  with  whom 
religion  is  a  matter  of  indifference  or  dislike.  I  entreat 
such  to  distrust  the  influences  under  which  they  have 
come  to  that  result.  I  am  sure  that  I  have  said  enough 
to  show  them,  that  any  subject  would  have  failed  to 
interest  them  under  the  same  influences ;  the  influences 
of  neglect,  of  misconception,  and  of  mistaken  treat- 
ment. It  is  not  the  bright  and  glorious  truth  of 
heaven  that  is  in  fault.  It  is  not  your  own  nature  that 
is  in  fault.  It  is  not  the  beneficence  of  God  that  has 
been  wanting   to  you.    But  human  error  has  been 


INDIFFERENCE    AND    AVERSION.  199 

fiowing  in  all  the  streams  of  life  around  you ;  and  an 
erring  heart  within,  has  too  easily  suffered  petrifaction 
and  death  to  steal  into  all  its  recesses.  Oh !  let  a  new 
life  be  breathed  there ;  and  you  shall  find  that  religion 
is  no  form,  no  irksome  restraint,  no  dull  compliance 
with  duty  merely,  but  spirit,  but  freedom,  but  life 
indeed ;  life  to  your  heart ;  the  beginning  of  a  higher 
life,  of  the  life  everlasting ! 


ON    THE 

ORIGINAL  USE  OF  THE  EPISTLES 

OF    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT, 

COMPARED  WITH   THEIR  USE  AND    APPLICATION   AT  THE  PRESENT  DAT 


To  the  weak  became  I  as  weak,  that  1  might  gain  the  weak  ;  1 
0771  made  all  things  to  all  men,  that  I  might  by  all  means  save 
some. — Cor.  ix.  22. 

That  is  to  say,  Paul  adapted  his  religions  instruc- 
tions to  the  men  whom  he  addressed,  to  their  particular 
character,  circumstances,  difficulties,  trials  and  specu- 
lations. "  Unto  the  Jews,  he  says,  I  became  as  a  Jew, 
that  I  might  gain  the  Jews ;  to  them  that  are  under 
the  law,  as  under  the  law,  that  I  might  gain  them 
that  are  under  the  law  ;  to  them  that  are  without 
law,  as  without  law,  that  I  might  gain  them  that  are 
without  law."  From  this  statement,  we  derive  the 
following  principle  of  interpretation,  viz.,  that  Paul, 
and  it  may  be  added,  that  all  the  sacred  writers,  did 
not  deliver  their  instructions  in  an  abstract  and  general 
form  adapted  alike  and  equally  to  all  times,  but 
that  they  had  a  local  and  special  reference  to  the  times 
in  which  they  wrote.  It  was  in  conformity  with  this 
principle,  that  the  Apostle  said  to  the  Athenians,  "  The 
times  of  this  ignorance  God  winked  at,  but  now  com- 
mandeth  all  men  every  where  to  repent ;"  and  to  the 
Corinthians,  he  gave  advice  adapted  to  a  particular 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 


201 


occasion,  saying,  "  I  suppose  that  this  is  good  for  the 
present  distress" — that  is  the  instruction  which  I  give 
you  is  suited  to  the  present  exigency. 

As  I  propose  to  apply  this  principle  of  interpretation 
to  some  subjects  in  the  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament, 
1  wish  to  place  it  distinctly  before  you,  and  in  the  outset, 
to  guard  it  from  misapprehension.  It  may  at  once  be 
asked,  if  the  Scriptures  were  not  written  for  all  men. 
Let  us  then  explain,  and  it  will  be  seen,  I  think,  that 
the  Bible  could  not  to  any  valuable  purpose,  have  been 
written  for  all  men,  if  it  had  not  been  written  for 
some  men  in  particular. 

The  Scriptures  not  only  bear  marks  of  belonging  to 
the  periods  and  persons  that  produced  them,  but  they 
bear  marks  of  perpetual  adaptation  to  the  state,  the 
opinions,  the  prejudices,  in  one  word,  to  the  moral 
wants  of  the  men  to  whom  they  were  immediately 
addressed.  When  God  commissioned  prophets  and 
apostles  to  be  the  instructers  of  the  world,  he  did  not 
bereave  them  at  once,  of  their  reason,  their  common 
sense,  their  observation.  He  rather  taught  them  more 
clearly  to  perceive,  and  more  keenly  to  feel  the  situa- 
tion, the  difficulties,  the  fears  and  hopes,  the  sorrows,  the 
dangers  of  those  to  whom  they  directed  their  message. 
He  filled  their  hearts  with  peculiar  solicitude  and 
sympathy  for  the  very  persons  to  whom  they  were 
sent.  How,  then,  could  they  fail  to  address  themselves 
to  the  particular  state  and  case  of  these  persons  !  In- 
deed, all  true  feeling,  all  tender  sympathy,  all  fervent 
religion  is  from  its  very  nature  specific  and  circum- 
stantial. It  does  not  waste  itself  in  barren  generalities. 
It  has  some  specific  objects,  over  which  it  meditates 
and  is  anxious  ;  over  which  it  ponders,  and  hopes  and 
prays. 

There  is  a  very  striking  character  of  this  kind  in  our 


202  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

Scriptures,  and  one  that  distinguishes  them,  as  far  as  I 
have  observed  from  all  other  systems  of  philosophy  and 
religion.  The  instructions  of  the  Bible  are  local, 
circumstantial,  specific.  We  have  not  in  them  a  few 
cold  and  general  precepts,  some  wise  sayings,  some 
sententious  paragraphs,  some  mottos  of  moral  specula- 
tion. We  hear  not  in  them  the  staid  and  haughty 
philosopher  who  can  scarcely  condescend  to  lay  down 
the  law  to  his  ignorant  fellow-mortals.  We  hear  not 
the  grave  impostor,  who  would  make  up  for  his  heart- 
lessness  and  hypocrisy  by  an  air  of  wisdom  and 
pretension.  The  Christian  teachers  did  not  pause  in 
stately  halls  or  retired  groves  to  deliver  their  messages, 
but  they  went  down  into  the  crowd  of  men,  into  the 
places  of  domestic  abode  ;  they  penetrated  into  the 
recesses  of  human  feeling ;  they  communed  with 
human  frailty  and  human  sorrow  and  joy :  they  had 
something  for  every  mind.  They  entered  into  the 
circumstances  of  men,  into  their  daily  wants  and  trials. 
It  is  this  that  has  communicated  such  a  spirit  and 
charm  to  their  writings.  They  would  never  have 
found  the  deep  springs  of  human  thought  and  emotion 
(let  the  truism  be  pardoned)  if  they  had  not  searched 
for  them  where  they  actually  were.  And  they  could 
not  have  searched  for  them,  but  by  removing  the 
rubbish  of  systems  and  speculations,  of  errors  and  pre- 
judices which  was  thrown  over  them :  that  is  to  say, 
but  by  applying  themselves  to  the  circumstances  and 
feelings  of  the  time. 

What  we  say  is,  that  the  inspired  teachers  wrote  for 
men;  for  men  of  the  very  period  and  nation,  of  the 
very  customs  and  character,  in  the  midst  of  which  they 
lived.  They  wrote  for  all  men,  indeed,  but  they  could 
not,  I  repeat,  have  done  this,  if  they  had  not  written  for 
some  men  in  particular.    And  to  understand  their  writ- 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  203 

ings,  we  must  consider  that  they  took  their  form  and 
colourmg  from  the  state  of  things  which  required  them. 
We  must  add  that  all  this  is  especially  applicable  to 
the  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament.  These,  indeed, 
were  particularly  called  forth  by  the  exigencies,  the 
difficulties,  the  trials,  of  the  primitive  churches. 
Indeed  if  men  had  received  the  simple  doctrine  of 
Jesus  without  objection  or  difficulty,  if  no  contentions 
and  controversies  had  sprung  up,  if  no  mistakes  nor 
oflfences  had  arisen,  these  Epistles  would  never  have 
been  written.  Some  instructions  the  Apostles  might 
have  given,  and  given  in  the  epistolary  form,  but  their 
epistles  would  not  have  borne  the  same  controversial 
aspect,  and  there  would  not  have  arisen  from  them  in 
subsequent  ages,  the  same  disputes  about  conversion 
and  election,  the  atonement  and  the  Trinity.  There 
would  not  in  short  have  been  the  same  difficulties 
in  the  interpretation  of  these  Epistles.  They  took 
theii'  form  from  circumstances :  and  with  these 
circumstances  we  have,  and  can  have,  but  a  partial 
acquaintance.  But  that  they  did  impart  an  influence, 
that  the  Epistles  were  written  for  the  age,  there  can  be 
no  doubt.  You  see  the  marks  of  adaptation  in  every 
sentence.  There  are  many  things  in  them  that  apply 
exclusively  to  the  early  Christians,  that  can  apply  to 
no  others.  Such,  for  instance,  are  the  answers  to 
questions,  the  solution  of  difficulties,  the  settlement  of 
disputes,  which  have  long  since  passed  away.  Such, 
too,  is  what  relates  to  the  use  of  prophetical  and 
miraculous  powers,  to  meats  offered  to  idols,  &c. 
These  things  do  not  noio  concern  us ;  because  we  have 
no  miraculous  powers,  and  there  are  no  idols  to  solicit 
our  offerings.  Will  any  man  say,  there  is  an  idol  in 
our  hearts  ?  Now,  this  is  the  very  sort  of  liberty  with 
the  Scriptures,  to  which  I  feel  compelled  to  object; 


204  USE    OP    THE    EPISTLES. 

this  spiritualizing-,  this  work  of  fanciful  analogies,  this 
attempt  to  make  the  Bible  mean  all  that  it  can  mean, 
under  the  notion  of  doing  honour  to  it.  It  is  both 
unjustifiable  and  injurious.  The  Bible  addresses  us 
as  reasonable  men  ;  let  us  read  it  as  reasonable  men. 

I  should  not  have  dwelt  so  long  on  the  very  obvious 
principle  that  has  now  been  discussed,  were  it  not  a 
principle  that  is  scarcely  yet  admitted  into  the 
prevailing  theological  speculations  of  our  times,  and  a 
principle  too  whose  importance  is  quite  equal  to  the 
neglect  into  which  it  has  fallen. 

Indeed,  it  cannot  fail  to  have  been  observed,  that  the 
habit  of  applying  the  language  of  the  Epistles, 
without  any  qualification,  to  the  subjects  of  Christian 
experience  and  of  Christian  speculation  in  later  times, 
has  been  one  of  the  most  fruitful  sources  of  error  in 
every  form ;  that  it  has  above  all  other  means,  fostered 
the  confidence  of  sectarians;  that  it  has  gratified  the 
pride  of  the  weak,  and  the  fancy  of  the  extravagant ; 
and  that  by  this  means,  bold  and  ignorant  men 
especially ;  the  unlearned  and  unstable,  have  wrested 
the  Scriptures  to  their  injury.  Such  men  have  always 
been  found  turning  away  from  the  simple  instructions 
of  Jesus,  to  the  high  mysteries  of  Paul,  and  the  former 
have  often  passed  for  little  better  than  flat  morality, 
while  the  latter,  circumstantial,  local,  involved  in  the 
shadows  of  an  ancient  age,  and  even  then,  "difl^cult, 
and  hard  to  be  understood,"  have  been  exclusively 
studied  as  containing  the  high  system  of  doctrine  and 
essence  of  all  spiritual  religion. 

There  is,  indeed,  what  must  have  struck  every 
attentive  mind,  a  very  remarkable  difference  between 
the  instructions  of  our  Saviour  and  his  Apostles ;  but 
it  was  a  difference  chiefly  owing  to  circumstances.  It 
was  a  difference  not  in  the  substance,  but  in  the  form, 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  205 

in  the  topics  of  religious  instruction.  Our  Saviour's 
teaching  was  evidently  more  simple,  and  more  entirely 
practical.  It  dealt  more  in  easy  and  intelligible  expo- 
sitions and  illustrations  of  truth  and  duty,  of  piety  and 
acceptance  with  God.  Our  Saviour  was  announcing 
a  system  which  had  not  yet  encountered  objection.  It 
could  not  meet  with  objection  till  it  was  announced. 
But  the  Apostles  had  to  contend  with  a  world  of 
objectors  of  every  description.  Hence  their  instructions 
became  more  speculative,  more  complicated,  more 
intermixed  with  the  institutions  and  ideas  and  preju- 
dices of  the  age;  and  in  just  that  proportion,  they 
became  more  argumentative  and  obscure.  I  say,  that 
the  Epistles  contain  nothing  in  the  substance  of 
religious  instruction  that  is  new.  But  whether  they 
do  or  not ;  whether  the  novel  aspect  which  they  bear, 
is  in  any  measure,  given  by  new  information;  it  is 
very  certain  that  much  of  it  is  the  colouring  of  circum- 
stances. And  it  is  from  a  neglect  to  consider  these 
circumstances ;  it  is  from  neglect  to  observe  the  local 
application  of  these  ancient  writings,  that  such  a 
strange  and  mischievous  use  has  been  made  of  them ; 
that  bad  and  erroneous  notions  of  religion  still  prevail 
among  many;  and  that  with  all,  a  veil  of  obscurity 
still  remains  in  the  reading  of  them. 

But  there  is  a  danger  on  the  other  hand.  There  is 
danger  of  forgetting  in  the  local  application  of  these 
writings,  that  they  have  any  other:  of  supposing  that 
they  had  not  only  a  special,  but  an  exclusive  reference 
to  ancient  times;  and  danger,  therefore,  of  suffering 
them  to  fall  into  neglect,  and  of  leaving  out  of  sight 
that  practical  import,  which  belongs  to  all  periods.  In 
opposition  to  this  impression  that  the  Epistles  had  an 
exclusive  reference  to  their  own  age,  it  is  sufficient  to 
observe,  that  it  is  incompatible,  in  the  first  place,  with 
18 


206  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

the  very  nature  of  moral  writings,  and  in  the  second 
place,  with  the  prophetic  views  of  the  Apostles,  who 
evidently  considered  themselves  as  dispensing  truths 
which  would  be  interesting  to  all  times. 

It  becomes  very  important  therefore,  to  consider 
what  in  the  Epistles  was  peculiar  to  the  times  in 
which  they  were  written,  and  what  belongs  to  us ;  that 
we  may  be  guarded  from  obscure  and  erroneous  views 
of  them  on  the  one  hand,  and  from  a  negligent  and 
indifferent  regard  to  them  on  the  other.  Some  attempt 
is  therefore  proposed  to  make  this  distinction  between 
the  special  and  general  application  of  certain  terms 
and  subjects,  in  the  Epistles ;  to  point  out  the  peculiar 
propriety  and  particular  use  of  them,  as  adapted  to  the 
circumstances  of  the  early  Christians,  and  to  show 
what  is  left  in  them  for  our  instruction  and  comfort  in 
these  later  times. 

I.  The  first  subject  which  I  shall  mention,  is  the 
institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Nothing  can  be  more 
simple,  cheerful  and  inviting  than  this  institution  was, 
as  it  originally  came  from  the  hands  of  its  Founder; 
as  it  was  first  celebrated,  with  easy  though  serious 
conversation,  and  in  the  common  manner  of  a  Jewish 
supper,  by  our  Lord  and  his  Disciples. 

Now  there  is  a  passage  on  this  subject  in  an  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  containing  a  strain  of  tremendous 
denunciation  which  has  spread  terror  through  every 
succeeding  age  of  the  church.  Many  sincere  and 
serious  persons  even  at  this  day,  tremble  and  hesitate 
and  actually  refuse  to  obey  a  plain  command  of  the 
Scriptures,  lest  they  should  incur  the  weight  of  that 
fearful  curse,  and  should  "eat  and  drink  damnation  to 
themselves."  It  has  actually  been  supposed  by  multi- 
tudes that  they  were  liable  to  set  the  seal  to  their 
everlasting  perdition,  by  a  serious  and  conscientious 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 


207 


endeavour  to  obey  the  command  of  God.  What  deplo- 
rable views  of  God,  these  imaginations  must  have 
nurtured,  and  how  much  they  must  have  interfered 
with  the  comfort  and  improvement  of  Christians,  need 
not  be  said.  It  is  more  to  our  purpose,  to  remark,  that 
the  difficulty  has  arisen  entirely  from  neglecting  to 
consider  the  circumstances.  It  is  true  indeed,  that 
there  has  been  a  great  misunderstanding  of  the  terms 
of  this  denunciation ;  but  there  has  been  a  still  greater 
inattention  to  the  particular  and  local  appUcation  of  it. 
It  was  aimed  against  a  riotous,  licentious  and  profane 
use  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  which  the  Corinthians  had 
been  guilty  of  excess  and  even  of  intemperance.  It 
belongs  therefore,  to  the  Corinthian  church,  and  to  no 
other,  until  indeed  another  shall  be  found  which  is 
guilty  of  the  same  sacrilege. 

Still  there  is  something  in  this  passage  for  our 
instruction  and  admonition.  We  learn  from  it,  in 
opposition  to  what  has  been  commonly  supposed,  that 
there  is  no  mysterious  and  fatal  curse,  awaiting  the 
abuse  of  this  ordinance  in  particular;  for  Paul  does 
not  treat  the  Corinthians  as  persons  who  had  sealed 
their  own  destruction ;  he  does  not  even  so  much  as 
cut  them  off  from  the  communion  of  the  churches,  but 
still  calls  them  Brethren,  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus, 
and  called  to  be  saints,  and  affectionately  exhorts 
them  to  reform  this  evil  practice.  We  are  admonished, 
on  the  other  hand,  that  this  feast  is  not  to  be  regarded 
as  common  but  as  sacred;  that  the  ordinance  is 
solemn,  and  is  to  be  approached  with  reverence;  and 
that  to  violate  this  as  to  violate  any  ordinance  of 
divine  worship,  involves  heinous  guilt.  At  the  same 
time,  I  think,  we  may  gather  from  this  passage,  that 
the  ordinance  of  the  Supper  was  not  looked  upon,  in 
early  times,  with  that  peculiar  awe  and  dread,  which 


20&' 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 


prevails  in  many  minds  at  this  day ;  for  it  is  incredible 
that  with  these  views,  the  Corinthians  bad  as  they 
were,  could  ever  have  fallen  into  such  gross  mdecorum. 
11.  The  next  subject  which  I  shall  notice,  though 
very  slightly,  and  chiefly  for  the  sake  of  illustration, 
is  that  of  intermarriages  between  Christians  and 
unbelievers.  Such  connexions,  as  you  know,  were 
prohibited.  Now  it  only  needs  to  be  considered  who 
these  unbelievers  were,  to  convince  us  that  such 
prohibition  was  extremely  reasonable  for  that  time, 
and  also  quite  peculiar  to  it.  An  unbeliever  was  a 
Pagan;  one  of  a  different  and  hostile  religion;  a 
connexion  with  whom  was  likely  to  prove  extremely 
inconvenient,  if  not  hazardous.  Hence  the  Apostle 
says,  "Be  ye  not  unequally  yoked  w4th  unbelievers." 
It  would  be  about  as  absurd  to  apply  this  prohibition 
literally  to  our  circumstances,  as  the  prohibition  under 
which  the  ancient  Jews  were  laid,  forbidding  them  to 
intermarry  with  the  Canaanites.  There  are  no  vmbe- 
lievers  among  us,  in  the  particular  sense  in  which  the 
Apostle  used  this  term.  We  are  far  from  saying  that 
there  is  no  difference  between  the  good  and  the  bad ; 
or  that  connexions  between  such  are  inexpedient. 
But  to  hold  the  Apostolic  prohibition  to  apply  strictly 
to  our  times;  and  then  to  assume  the  prerogative  to 
decide  infallibly  who  is  a  Christian ;  and  to  make  this 
abstract  inquiry,  a  previous  question  in  the  matter ;  to 
undertake  this,  is  incompatible,  to  say  the  least,  with 
our  knowledge  and  our  circumstances.  And  yet  this 
is  maintained  to  be  right  and  necessary,  by  great 
numbers  of  Christians  of  the  present  age.  There  may 
be  indeed,  a  moral  maxim  gathered  from  the  Apostle's 
instruction  on  this  subject,  which  is  indeed  the  maxim 
of  common  sense,  with  regard  to  the  importance  of 
a  similarity  of  habits,  tastes,  &c.     And  in  this  limited 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  209 

application,  it  may  be  asked,  "  What  fellowship  hath 
rio-hteousness  with  iiniio^hteousness ?  and  what  com- 
mimion  hath  light  with  darkness?" 

These  two  instances  may  serve  to  illustrate  our 
general  principle.  And  we  pass  from  them  to  subjects 
of  Christian  doctrine  and  experience. 

III.  I  proceed  therefore  to  remark  thirdly,  that  the 
terms  faith  and  justification  had  a  propriety  and  a 
use  which  has  passed  away  with  the  age  in  which 
they  were  first  adopted.  I  take  these  terms  together 
because  they  are  intimately  connected.  Men  were 
perpetually  said  to  be  justified  by  faith,  and  this  was 
much  insisted  on.  Before  this  we  hear  of  justification 
by  humility,  as  in  the  case  of  the  publican  whose 
prayer  is  recorded ;  of  forgiveness  which  is  the  same 
as  justification,  through  the  means  of  forgiving  others ; 
of  acceptance  with  God  through  the  means  of  piety 
as  the  condition  on  our  part :  but  the  moment  we  pass 
into  the  Epistles,  we  find  that  all  this  comes  by  faith. 
Now,  the  truth  is,  that  the  condition  is  really  not 
varied.  It  is  essentially  the  same  in  both  cases.  It 
is  that  piety  or  goodness,  without  which  it  is  impossible 
to  possess,  or  if  possessed,  to  enjoy  the  divine  favour 
and  approbation.  And  this  condition  is  constantly 
represented  in  the  Epistles  to  be  faith ;  for  these 
reasons — because  a  new  religion  was  proposed,  whose 
first  demand  would  of  course  be  for  faith  in  it;  and 
because  such  faith  when  embraced  and  avowed  in  that 
age  of  prejudice  and  persecution,  was  an  unques- 
tionable proof  of  sincere  and  pious  conviction,  and 
hence  naturally  came  to  pass  for  piety  itself 

Much  too  is  said  of  justification  through  the  free 

grace  of  God,  because  the  Apostles  had  to  encounter 

the  pride  of  philosophers  and  the  self-sufliciency  of 

formalists  in  religion ;  because  they  found  every  where 

18* 


210  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

prevailing,  the  notion  that  rites  and  sacrifices  were 
entitled  to  procure  the  favour  of  God.  Justification 
therefore,  not  by  sacrifices  or  by  works  as  properly 
meritorious,  but  by  grace,  by  the  mercy  of  God ;  and 
justification  not  by  ceremonial  observances,  but  by  a 
living  faith  and  obedience ;  these  were  views  of  religious 
truth  that  needed  to  be  particularly  urged. 

Now  it  is  rather  awkward,  or  at  least,  it  is  unfor- 
tunate, that  these  terms  should  occupy  the  same  place 
in  our  theology  and  moral  instruction  as  they  did  in 
those  of  the  apostles  ;  because  the  particular  occasion 
and  propriety  of  them  has  passed  away.  We  are  a 
nation  of  believers :  I  do  not  say  of  true  Christians, 
but  of  believers  in  the  popular  sense  of  that  term. 
There  can  be  no  such  propriety  in  urging  faith  upon 
us,  as  upon  an  assembly  of  Pagans,  and  it  cannot  be 
urged  at  all  without  many  explanations  ;  and  after  all, 
being  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  What  needs  to  be 
pressed  upon  us  now  as  a  prominent  point,  is  a  different 
form  of  piety.  It  is  not  so  much  faith,  as  obedience. 
And  as  to  gratuitous  justification,  as  to  free  grace,  the 
danger  seems  now  to  be,  not  of  trusting  to  the  mercy 
of  God  too  little  but  too  much  ;  and  of  making  not  too 
much  of  our  own  works,  but  of  making  far  too  little. 

The  attempt  to  apply  the  apostolic  views  of  faith 
and  justification  in  all  their  extent  and  frequency  to 
our  experience,  has  been  unfortunate  also,  because 
it  has  led  to  unnatural,  mystical  ideas  of  religion,  and 
among  other  ideas,  it  has  led  men  to  conjure  up  the 
preposterous  notion  that  the  great  obstacle  to  salvation 
in  the  human  heart,  is  not  its  bad  passions,  but  some 
strange  unwillingness  to  be  saved  by  the  mercy  of 
God;  and  that  faith,  being  so  exclusively  and  all- 
important,  had  some  mysterious  power  of  appropriating 
and  securing  the  favour  of  God  to  itself     Indeed  faith 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  2H 

has  been  often  thought  to  be  nothing  else  but  a  willing- 
ness to  be  saved. 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  never  to  be  forgotten,  that 
we  are  saved  by  grace ;  and  if  there  is  yet  among 
us  any  lingering  thought  of  deserving  heaven  by  our 
good  deeds,  we  need  to  be  reminded  of  the  earnestness, 
with  which  the  apostles  taught,  that  we  are  saved  by 
grace  ;  by  the  free  grace,  the  benignity,  the  forgiving 
compassion  of  our  Maker.  And  if  any  of  us  are 
thinking  that  our  claim  to  the  divine  favour  though  not 
perfect,  is  yet  quite  promising  ;  that  we  have  done  so 
little  evil  and  have  led  a  life  so  moral  and  unimpeach- 
able, that  it  would  be  unjust  in  God  to  punish  us  for 
our  sin,  Ave  may  rest  assured  that  we  know  little  of 
ourselves  and  less  still,  of  that  humility,  contrition  and 
deep  sense  of  unworthiness  that  belong  to  the  real 
Christian. 

IV.  The  remarks  which  have  been  made,  might  be 
applied  to  several  topics  in  the  Epistles,  but  we  are 
limited  for  the  present  to  one  further :  I  mean  the 
subject  of  religious  experience.  Religious  experience 
in  the  early  age,  was  itself  strongly  coloured  by  circum- 
stances and  the  description  of  it  still  more. 

It  is  to  be  considered  in  the  first  place,  that  the 
circumstances  of  that  age  gave  to  religion  a  character 
of  powerful  excitement.  We  are  to  remember  that 
it  was  the  age  of  miracles,  of  signs  and  wonders  ;  that 
it  was  the  era  of  a  ncAV  and  wonderful  revelation  ;  that 
it  was  the  epoch  of  a  new  religious  dominion  ;  and  that 
men's  minds  were  strongly  excited  by  what  was  novel, 
marvellous  and  prospective  around  them.  We  are  to 
remember  that  the  new  religion,  aroused  them  from  a 
guilty  and  degraded  idolatry  and  naturally  filled  them 
with  amazement  and  alarm. 

Again,  it  is  to  be  considered  that  the  circumstances 


m 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 


of  that  age  made  religion,  if  I  may  speak  so,  a  more 
notable  thing ;  a  thing  more  easily  marked  by  dates, 
more  easily  referred  to  a  certain  period  of  time. 
Conversion  in  that  day,  consisted  of  two  parts.  It  was 
a  turning  from  Paganism  to  Christianity ;  and  it  was 
a  turning  from  sin  to  holiness.  Conversion  therefore 
was  both  an  event  and  an  experience  ;  not  an  experi- 
ence only  as  it  now  is,  but  an  event ;  a  thing  that  could 
be  dated  from  a  certain  day  and  hour.  We  are  to 
remember  then,  that  conversion  was  not  a  change  of 
affections  only  but  of  the  Avhole  religion  ;  a  change  of 
rites,  of  customs,  of  the  whole  course  of  life ;  that  it 
was  a  change  of  hopes  too ;  that  it  introduced 
men  into  a  new  world,  a  world  of  new  and  bright 
and  astonishing  revelations :  that  for  this  reason  a 
new  phraseology  became  applicable  to  them,  not  to 
their  character  entirely  but  in  part  to  their  circum- 
stances ;  that  they  became  at  once,  externally  rather 
than  internally,  new  creatures  ;  that  old  things  passed 
away  and  all  things  became  new ;  that  they  were 
brought  out  of  darkness  into  marvellous  light.  We 
see  in  all  this,  I  say,  the  colouring  of  circumstances. 
These  men  were  not  at  once  made  perfect  and  fit  for 
heaven  ;  as  the  language  would  seem  to  represent ;  for 
they  were  urged  to  make  their  calling  and  election 
sure.  The  language  describes  an  inward  change 
indeed  ;  but  it  also  describes  a  ceremonial  change.  If 
the  change  had  been  altogether  spiritual,  we  doubtless 
should  have  had  a  simpler  and  more  accurate 
phraseology  on  the  subject.  We  know  indeed  that  an 
instantaneous  and  total  change,  of  all  the  habits, 
thoughts,  feelings  and  purposes  of  the  soul,  is  incom- 
patible with  the  nature  of  the  mind  and  with  all  proper 
moral  influence  upon  it. 

It  can  require  but  a  little  reflection  to  convince  you 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  213 

of  all  this.  You  must  have  observed,  also,  what 
injuiy  the  literal  application  of  this  language  to  reli- 
gious experience  in  later  days,  has  produced,  by  awak- 
ening noisy  excitement  an  abundant  joys  and  rash 
confidence,  and  on  the  whole,  an  artificial  and  extrava- 
gant experience,  at  a  moment  when  simplicity  and  mo- 
desty and  anxiety  and  watchfulness  were  of  all  things 
the  most  suitable  and  desirable.  And  you  must  have 
reflected,  how  much  better  and  fitter  it  would  have 
been,  in  that  moment  of  imaginary  or  real  conversion, 
for  the  subject  of  it,  instead  of  coming  forth  to  the 
multitude  to  tell  what  the  Lord  had  done  for  his  soul, 
to  have  gone  away  to  his  retired  closet  to  pray,  and  to 
carry  on  the  secret  struggle  of  the  religious  life  in  his 
own  bosom ;  how  much  better  for  him  who  thinks 
himself  to  have  been  a  Christian  but  for  one  hour  or  for 
one  day,  in  that  day,  in  that  hour,  to  be  silent,  thought- 
ful, difl[ident,  anxious ! 

But  there  is  danger  and  great  danger,  on  the  other 
hand.  Perceiving  that  the  apostolic  language  had  a 
special  application  to  former  times,  we  may  imagine 
that  it  has  little  or  no  relation  to  us.  The  colouring 
of  circumstance,  which  is  spread  over  their  phraseology, 
may  hide  from  us  its  deep  and  serious  meaning.  We 
may  imagine  that  the  doctrine  of  conversion  is  but  an 
antiquated  notion,  with  which  we  have  little  or  no 
concern.  We  may  look  upon  it  as  the  costume  of 
religious  experience  in  an  ancient  age,  which  is  now 
quite  laid  aside.  Yet  how  strange  would  it  be  to  sup- 
pose a  costume  which  clothed  nothing,  or  a  body  of 
phraseology,  if  I  may  speak  so,  without  a  hving  spirit ! 
And  how  low  must  be  our  conceptions  of  Jesus  and 
his  apostles,  of  the  most  spiritual  teachers  the  world 
ever  saw,  if  we  imagine  their  ultimate  object  to  have 
been,  to  bring  about  a  formal  change  of  religion,  a 


214 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 


mere  change  of  rites  and  names ! — Their  doctrine, 
may  it  never  be  forgotten  !  pointed  chiefly  to  the  heart ; 
and  we  all  have  a  concern  with  it  more  weighty  and 
solemn  than  any  circumstances  can  impose.  If,  my 
friends,  if  we  are  Christians  only  in  name,  if  we  hope 
for  heaven  only  because  we  were  born  in  a  Christian 
land,  we  still  need  a  conversion.  If  we  are  worldly ; 
if  we  are  covetous  or  sensual ;  if  we  are  guided  by 
inclination  rather  than  by  duty,  we  need  a  conversion  ; 
not  less  than  that  which  the  Pagan  experienced.  If 
we  are  unkind,  severe,  censorious  or  injurious,  in  the 
relations  or  the  intercourse  of  life  ;  if  we  are  unfaithful 
parents  or  undutiful  children  ;  if  we  are  severe  masters 
or  faithless  servants  ;  if  we  are  treacherous  friends  or 
bad  neighbours  or  bitter  competitors,  we  need  a  conver- 
sion ;  we  need  a  change,  greater  than  merely  from 
Paganism  to  Christianity.  If  in  fine  we  have  never 
yet  formed  the  resolute  and  serious  purpose  of  leading 
a  religious  life  ;  if  we  do  not  love  the  duties  of  piety ; 
if  we  have  not  yet  learnt  the  fear  of  God  nor  cherished 
the  spirit  of  prayer,  we  need  a  conversion.  We  need 
to  be  anxious  :  we  need  to  fear.  We  need  to  strive  to 
enter  in  at  the  straio^ht  orate. 

Religion  is  as  full  of  absorbing  interest  now  as  it  ever 
was.  And  if  we  ever  enter  this  way  of  life,  though 
our  access  to  it  will  hardly  be  joyful  and  triumphant, 
if  we  are  wise ;  yet  there  will  be — let  us  not  take  the 
part  of  the  cold  hearted  scoffer !  there  will  be  joys, 
abundant  joys  in  its  progress  ;  and  there  will  be  tri- 
umph, glorious  triumph  in  its  close.  But  first,  there 
will  be  as  of  old,  many  an  anxious  struggle,  many  a 
serious  meditation,  many  an  earnest  prayer  :  there 
will  be,  there  must  be  watchings  and  fears,  there  must 
be  striving  and  hope  ;  and  then  will  come  the  triumph. 
Yes,  Christian !  there  will  be  triumph,  glorious  triumph ; 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  215 

when  you  can  say,  with  the  fervent  apostle.  "  I  have 
fought  a  good  fight,  I  have  finished  my  course,  I  have 
kept  the  faith ;  henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a 
crown  of  righteousness  which  the  Lord  the  righteous 
judge  will  give  me  at  that  day." 


11 


To  the  weak  became  I  as  weak,  that  I  might  gain  the  weak  ;  1 
am  made  all  things  to  all  men,  that  I  might  by  all  means  save 
some. — 1.  Cor.  ix.  22, 

The  use  which  has  been  made  of  this  passage  will 
be  recollected.  It  manifestly  supports  the  principle 
that  Paul's  instructions  were  modified  by  the  circum- 
stances in  which  they  were  given.  We  are  therefore 
led  to  conclude  that  there  was  something,  in  the  man  - 
ner  and  form  of  the  apostolic  instructions  peculiar  to 
the  early  age  ;  while  at  the  same  time,  there  is  a  spirit 
in  them  that  belongs  to  all  ages. 

V.  We  have  attempted  in  some  particulars,  to  make 
this  distinction  between  the  local  and  the  general 
application  of  them,  and  proceed  directly  to  notice  as 
a  fifth  instance  of  this  distinction,  the  manner  in  ivhich 
our  ^'Saviour  is  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament. 
Now  there  are  two  circumstances  which  affected  this 
manner. 

The  first  indeed  was  not  entirely  peculiar  to  that 
age,  but  it  deserves  to  be  mentioned  as  stamping  a 
peculiarity  upon  the  language  of  the  apostles  concern- 
ing Jesus  Christ.  It  was  common  to  call  a  system  in 
religion  or  philosophy  familiarly  by  the  name  of  its 
founder ;  so  that  the  name  of  the  founder,  became  a 
kind  of  appellative  for  the  system.  Thus  Plato,  was 
the  famihar  name  for  the  doctrine  or  philosophy  of 
Plato.  Thus  Christians  were  said  to  be  in  Christ,  to 
be  baptised  into  him,  to  put  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; 
these  phrases  meaning  of  course  the  principles  and 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  217 

doctrines  of  his  religion.  Now  this  was  the  custom  of 
the  age,  the  style  of  writing  and  speaking ;  it  was 
form ;  it  was  phraseology ;  and  we  are  perfectly  at 
liberty  to  lay  it  aside  when  it  is  no  longer  consonant 
with  our  general  habits  of  speaking ;  and  when  we 
look  less  with  admiration  upon  Jesus  Christ,  as  the 
founder  of  a  new  system,  than  with  veneration,  as  the 
Saviour  of  men.  And  yet  this  sort  of  phraseology  is 
with  some  the  test  of  evangelical  preaching ;  and 
though  you  speak  never  so  clearly  and  fervently  of 
the  great  principles  of  Christianity,  it  will  be  said,  and 
perhaps  contemptuously  said,  that  "there  is  nothing  of 
Christ  in  it." 

But  there  is  another  circumstance  to  be  mentioned. 
It  is  this :  that  the  apostles  spoke  of  Jesus  as  eye-wit- 
nesses ;  as  those  who  had  seen  him  in  his  teachings, 
in  his  sufferings  ;  who  had  been  with  him  and  lived 
with  him ;  and  who  would  naturally  speak  of  him 
with  the  warmth  of  a  personal  interest  and  friendship. 
These  remarks  apply  to  Paul  also,  for  there  was  doubt- 
less a  mutual  sympathy  among  the  early  disciples,  in 
these  feelings  ;  there  was  a  spirit  of  the  age.  Perhaps 
it  is  in  imitation  of  this,  without  the  same  circum- 
stances to  justify  it,  that  there  is  sometimes  witnessed 
an  irreverent  and  almost  shocking  familiarity  with  the 
name  of  Jesus :  and  a  neglect  to  consider  the  circum- 
stances, together  with  doctrinal  errors,  has  led  others, 
perhaps,  to  speak  of  Jesus  Christ  with  an  affection, 
trust  and  delight,  far  beyond  what  they  ever  ascribe  to 
God  the  Father.  So  that  a  writer  justly  remarks,  that 
a  discourse  on  the  goodness  of  God,  shall  pass  for  some- 
thing very  flat,  cold  and  common-place ;  while  a 
discourse  on  the  compassion  of  Christ  to  sinners,  shall 
be  looked  upon  as  containing  the  very  marrow  and 
essence  of  the  gospel. 
19 


218  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

There  certainly  have  been  in  the  world,  and  are,  very 
singular  and  superstitious  feelings  concerning  Jesus 
Christ ;  there  is  a  peculiarity  in  men's  regard  towards 
him,  of  which  I  do  not  remember  to  have  seen  any 
explanation  attempted.  Nothing  has  been  so  sacred 
in  religion  as  the  name  of  Christ :  nothing  deemed  so 
awful  as  to  profane  it ;  not  even  to  profane  the  name 
of  God  himself.  Nothing  has  so  tasked  and  awed  and 
overwhelmed  the  minds  of  men,  as  inquiries  into  his 
nature  and  offices.  Of  the  dread  attributes  of  God,  of 
the  momentous  concerns  of  human  duty,  they  could 
freely  reason  and  speculate.  Concerning  these  sub- 
jects it  has  not  been  thought  rash  to  inquire.  Nay,  it 
has  been  judged  lawful  and  wise,  not  only  to  examine 
our  early  impressions  but  to  modify,  to  change,  to 
improve  them.  Indeed,  every  thing  else  in  religion  is 
open  to  our  scrutiny.  But  the  moment  any  one  under- 
takes to  scrutinize  the  character  and  offices  of  our 
Saviour,  he  is  assailed  with  voices  of  warning.  If  he 
dares  to  doubt,  he  is  given  up  for  lost.  It  would  seem 
as  if  there  was  some  peculiar  and  superstitious  fear  of 
doing  wrong  or  offence  to  Christ,  a  scrupulous  care  on 
this  point,  a  punctiliousness  of  devotion  to  him  ;  such 
as  the  idolater  pays  to  the  deity  he  most  fears,  or  to 
the  symbol  he  most  reverences.  Or,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  same  general  state  of  mind  takes  the  form  of  a 
fond  and  sentimental  attachment,  expressed  by  the 
most  odious  and  offensive  freedoms  of  speech.  And 
many  really  imagine  that  while  with  a  kind  of  sympa- 
thetic fervour  they  are  embracing  the  being  of  their 
impassioned  imagination  and  are  calling  him  "  dear 
Saviour,"  and  "  precious  Christ,"  and  "  lovely  Jesus," 
they  are  entering  into  the  very  heart  and  life  of 
religion. 

Without    undertaking   fully    to    account    for   this 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  219 

extravagant  state  of  inind,  which  would  lead  us  too 
far  from  our  object,  we  may  remark  m  passmg  that  it 
has  probably,  in  part,  grown  out  of  a  mistaken  and 
improper  attempt  to  adopt  entirely  the  language  and 
feeling  of  the  early  disciples.  The  imitation  has 
indeed,  as  usual,  gone  far  beyond  the  original.  For 
never  did  the  apostles  inculcate  any  such  superstitious 
emotion  of  fear,  or  give  license  to  any  such  sickening 
fondness  of  language  concerning  Christ,  as  has  been 
witnessed  in  latter  days. 

Far  different  from  this,  far  more  rational,  far  more 
reverential,  far  more  profound  and  earnest  too,  is  the 
gratitude  and  admiration  which  we  are  bound  to  enter- 
tain for  the  greatest  moral  Benefactor  of  men.  The 
ages  that  have  intervened  between  us  and  his  actual 
residence  on  earth,  have  only  accumulated  evidences 
and  illustrations  of  the  value  and  grandeur  of  his  work. 
Be  it  so  that  his  teaching,  his  doctrine,  his  system  of 
rehgion,  is  often  figuratively  called  by  his  name  ;  yet 
it  is  none  the  less  true  that  he  is  a  real  person.  And 
however  much  cause  his  immediate  disciples  had  to 
revere  and  love  him,  we  have  none  the  less.  And 
although  our  attachment  to  him  must  be  less  personal 
than  theirs,  although  it  must  partake  less  of  the 
character  of  an  intimate  friendship ;  yet  it  may  be,  if 
possible,  even  more  reverential,  more  intellectual,  more 
expanded.  I  know  not  what  enthusiasm  for  excellence 
is ;  I  know  not  what  veneration  for  goodness  and 
gratitude  for  kindness  are,  if  these  sentiments  do  not 
peculiarly  belong  to  the  Author  and  Finisher  of  our 
blessed  faith.  Let  me  hear  no  more  of  admiration,  of 
love  and  joy,  if  he  who  has  taught  me  peace  of  mind 
and  true  wisdom,  who  has  brought  me  nigh  to  God 
and  opened  for  me  the  path  to  immortality,  if  he  shall 
not  be  admired  and  loved,  and  hailed  with  raptures  of 


230  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

joy.  This  is  no  fanatical  nor  superstitious  emotion, 
but  it  is  the  natural,  the  true  and  sober  homage  of 
human  feeling,  to  transcendent  worth  and  loveliness 
of  character,  and  to  unspeakable  goodness  ;  goodness 
not  common  and  earthly,  but  spiritual,  disinterested, 
divine ;  witnessed  by  toils  and  sufferings,  and  sealed 
in  death. 

What  though  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  visible 
manifestation  has  passed  away ;  what  though  the 
footsteps  of  the  Benefactor  and  the  Sufferer  no  longer 
tread  the  earth,  and  his  voice  no  longer  speaks  to  the 
weary  and  heavy-laden  ;  what  though  the  tears  of 
Gethsemane  no  longer  call  for  mortal  sympathies,  and 
the  dark  scene  of  Calvary  ha^  passed  away  from  the 
awful  mount,  and  all  the  wonderful  memorial  of  what 
he  was,  is  no  longer  told  by  living  and  admiring 
witnesses  ;  yet  all  this  was  but  the  preparation  for  his 
reign,  but  the  passage  to  his  throne  in  the  lasting 
admiration  and  affection  of  men.  If  it  is  much  to  us 
that  he  once  lived  among  men,  is  it  not  more  that  he 
now  liveth  at  the  right  hand  of  God  ?  If  it  interests 
us  to  go  back  to  the  scene  of  his  teaching  and  suffering, 
and  his  dying  hour,  does  it  not  still  more  interest  us 
that  we  may  hereafter  behold  the  same  teacher,  the 
same  sufferer,  him  Avho  Avas  dead  and  is  alive  again, 
and  liveth  forevermore  ?  Do  we  not  feel  that  in  the 
coming  world  we  have  a  forerunner,  and  that  we  are 
going  to  the  dwelling-place  of  a  friend,  to  mansions 
that  he  hath  gone  to  prepare  for  us  ?  Is  there  any  thing 
extravagant  or  enthusiastic  in  the  expectation,  that 
we  shall  know  hhn  whom  we  call  our  Saviour,  in  some 
new  manner  and  degree,  that  we  shall  learn  more  and 
more  of  the  loveliness  of  his  character  and  shall  hold 
with  him  a  sacred  communion,  a  sublime  friendship, 
forever  ?  I  think  not : — if  the  probabilities  which  reason 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  221 

offers,  if  the  revelations  which  the  Scriptures  unfold, 
may  be  listened  to.  In  all  this  I  persuade  myself  that 
I  entertain  no  superstitious  ideas  of  our  Saviour.  I 
regard  him  as  I  would  regard  any  other  benefactor ; 
only  that  he  is  the  most  exalted  of  all.  For  all  the 
blessings  of  this  life,  are  to  me  inconsiderable  compared 
with  what  he  has  taught  in  his  doctrine  with  what  he 
has  procured  by  his  death,  and  consummated  in  his 
rising  from  the  tomb. 

VI.  I  shall  now  introduce  as  a  sixth  and  final  topic 
of  illustration,  the  manner  in  which  the  relation  of 
Christians  to  one  another ^  and  to  the  loorld,  is  spoken 
of. 

And  in  the  first  plac^  the  relation  of  Christians  to 
one  another.  The  ancient  fellowship  of  Christians, 
was  something  considerably  different  from  what  the 
present  institutions  and  modes  of  society  permit. 
They  were  a  persecuted  and  proscribed  class  of  men. 
Almost  the  whole  world  was  united  against  them. 
Danger  and  death  waited  for  them  every  where. 
These  circumstances  produced  a  peculiar  union  and 
familiarity  among  them.  Their  exposure  was  common, 
and  they  were  endeared  to  one  another :  it  was 
imminent,  and  they  forgot  in  a  measure,  the  ordinary 
distinctions  of  social  life.  It  was  no  time  to  stand 
upon  etiquette  and  form.  The  weakest  member  of 
their  society  rose  into  importance,  when  he  might 
preserve  the  life  of  the  most  powerful,  or  be  called  on 
to  give  up  his  own  life  for  the  common  cause.  Hence 
the  apostles  exhort  them,  with  peculiar  emphasis,  to 
mutual  confidence,  intercourse,  counsel  and  aid,  and 
even  to  mutual  advice  and  exhortation. 

It  does  not  follow  that  it  is  now  expedient  to  break 
down  all  the  barriers  of  distinction  in  society.    It  does 
not  follow  that  it  is  now  the  duty  of  all  Christians  to 
19* 


222  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

mingle  together  in  the  intimate  intercourse  of  Ufe. 
The  proper  order  of  life,  the  different  modes  of  living, 
different  tastes  and  habits,  different  degrees  of  know- 
ledge and  refinement,  forbid  it. 

Let  Christians  learn  to  love  one  another :  this  is  all 
that  they  can  now  do  ;  and  this  is  enough.  Let  those 
Avho  come  to  the  same  sanctuary,  who  worship  at  the 
same  altar,  feel  that  respect  and  kindness  for  each 
other,  which  their  common  relation  and  common 
approach  to  the  same  God,  should  inspire.  We  wish 
indeed  that  more  of  the  spirit  of  the  ancient  fellowship 
was  among  us  ;  that  there  was  more  tenderness  for 
each  other's  faults,  more  zeal  and  solicitude  for  each 
other's  spiritual  improvement  and  comfort,  more  mutual 
intercession  at  the  common  throne  of  grace.  It  is 
lamentable  indeed,  that  the  outward  forms  of  society 
so  much  divide  us,  while  the  inward  spirit  so  little 
unites  us.  We  need  to  be  often  reminded  that  the 
exteiTial  distinctions  of  life  are  vain  and  perishing, 
and  that  another  order  of  greatness  and  honour  will 
obtain  in  the  world  to  which  we  are  going.  Let  us 
oftener  carry  ourselves  forward  beyond  this  state  of 
imperfect  allotments,  let  us  pass  beyond  these  bounds 
of  our  earthly  vision,  and  remember  that  he  whom  we 
scarcely  know  or  notice  here,  may  be  greater  and  more 
beloved  than  we  in  that  more  exalted  state,  may  be  the 
greatest  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  Let  us  then  free  our 
minds  from  those  low  and  worldly  ways  of  thinking 
which  too  much  prevail,  concerning  poverty  and  toil  and 
the  humble  lot.  It  may  be  the  best  and  the  safest  of 
all  conditions.  It  may  be  only  the  greater  trial,  for  the 
greater  reward.  It  may  be,  as  Ave  often  see  it  in  this 
life,  the  retirement  and  obscurity  that  is  to  open  to  the 
most  splendid  distinction  and  glory;  a  temporary 
darkness  that  is  to  give  place  to  the  brightest  day. 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  223 

Again ;  it  is  to  be  remarked,  that  the  description  of 
those  who  were  called  from  the  world  into  the  Christian 
church,  is  not  in  all  respects  applicable  to  the  present 
time.  We  are  told  that  "  Not  many  noble,  not  many 
mighty,  not  many  wise,  were  called,"  but  that  the  poor 
of  this  world  were  made  rich  in  faith,  and  the  ignorant 
were  made  wise  unto  salvation.  If  you  look  at  the 
state  of  things  m  that  day,  you  will  see  a  special 
reason  for  all  this.  The  profession  of  Christianity  was 
disgraceful.  To  take  the  name  of  Christian  was  to 
take  the  name  of  infamy.  The  chief  Apostle  tells  us 
that  he  and  his  companions  were  accounted  the  oflf- 
scouring  of  the  world.  Now  the  persons  who  would 
be  most  susceptible  of  the  fear  of  disgrace,  were  the 
great,  the  noble;  men  who  w^ere  in  high  and  con- 
spicuous stations,  who  had  a  character  at  stake,  and 
who  hved  in  a  state  of  society  too,  where  honour  was 
even  more  regarded  than  it  is  now.  Not  so  the  poor, 
the  ignorant,  the  unknown,  who  were  already  degraded 
and  trampled  on  by  their  superiors,  and  who  had  no 
honour  to  lose. 

Besides;  those  who  bore  rule  often  considered 
themselves  as  pledged  by  their  office,  to  persecute 
Christianity.  They  regarded  it  as  the  rival  of  their 
rehgion  and  the  enemy  of  their  power.  How  then 
could  many  such  be  expected  to  embrace  it ! 

And  with  regard  to  the  wise  of  that  day,  let  it  be 
considered  what  sort  of  wise  persons  they  were :  wise 
in  sophistry,  wise  in  the  subtleties  of  Grecian  specula- 
tion and  the  jargon  of  the  Oriental  philosophy,  wise  in 
their  own  conceit,  and  looking  down  with  ineffable 
contempt  on  the  vulgar.  Would  these  men  conde- 
scend to  be  taught  by  a  few  fishermen  from  GaUlee? 
Would  they  hear  of  a  teacher  from  the  despised  land 
of  Judea.^ 


USE    OP    THE    EPISTLES. 

But  things  are  now  changed.  The  inteUigent 
among  us  are  not  Hke  the  sages  of  those  days. 
Learning  is  more  aUied  to  common  sense  and  has 
taken  the  garb  of  modesty.  The  powerful  and  great 
among  us,  have  not  the  same  reasons  for  rejecting 
Christianity.  The  profession  of  it  is  respectable.  It 
is  the  religion  of  the  land.  And  Ave  can  point  to  many 
great  and  mighty  and  wise,  who  profess  and  adorn  it. 
And  on  the  whole,  in  a  general  and  fair  estimate,  there 
is  probably  more  virtue,  more  regard  to  the  Christian 
religion,  among  the  higher  than  among  the  lower 
classes  of  our  communities. 

It  is  altogether  unwarrantable  therefore,  to  apply  the 
ancient  comparison  to  the  present  state  of  things. 
Yet  there  are  not  wanting  examples  of  such  a  com- 
parison. If  for  instance,  one  form  of  Christianity 
attracts  the  more  intelligent,  opulent  and  respectable 
classes  of  society ;  if  there  is  a  progress,  an  improve- 
ment in  the  views  of  religion,  which  generally,  we  do 
not  say  universally,  draws  the  respect  and  attention  of 
more  improved  minds,  and  if  the  opposer  of  these 
views  is  annoyed  by  the  reflection  and  mortified  by  the 
comparison ;  "  Ah !  my  brethren,  he  says,  ye  know  how 
it  is  written,  that  not  many  wise,  not  many  mighty, 
not  many  noble  are  called  but  the  foolish  things  and 
the  weak  things  and  the  base  things,  and  things  that 
are  depised,  hath  God  chosen."  Now  I  shall  seriously 
tind  boldly  say,  that  he  ought  to  know  better  than  to 
make  such  an  application  of  Scripture.  By  this  rule 
of  judging,  he  might  level  and  degrade  all  that  is 
dignified  and  respectable  in  society ! 

The  higher  and  the  more  prosperous  classes  of  the 
community  undoubtedly,  have  their  dangers  and  faults. 
These  we  shall  be  led  to  notice  however,  under  the 


USE    OP    THE    EPISTLES.  225 

remaining  topic  of  this  general  head ;  viz.  the  relation 
of  the  Christian  church  to  the  world. 

Here  too  it  may  be  easily  shown,  I  think,  that  the 
language  of  the  Epistles  needs  to  be  qualified  in  its 
application  to  us ;  the  language,  I  say,  which  describes 
the  relation  of  the  Christian  church  to  the  world.  It 
was  said  of  Christians,  that  they  had  not  the  spirit  of 
the  world,  but  the  spirit  which  is  of  God ;  and  they 
were  commanded  not  to  be  conformed  to  the  Avorld. 
They  were  directed  to  come  out  from  the  surrounding 
world,  and  to  be  separate,  and  not  to  touch  the  unclean 
thing.  Now  this  language  is  understood  by  many,  as 
literally  applicable  to  our  present  circumstances,  though 
our  circumstances  are  immensely  different  from  those 
of  the  early  Christians.  And  it  may  Avell  be  feared, 
that  the  habit  of  applying  the  Apostolic  representations 
of  the  Heathen  world,  to  the  world  around  us,  and  of 
making  the  same  distinction  between  the  church  and 
the  world  that  then  existed,  has  awakened  in  some 
Christians  an  unamiable  pride  and  vanity,  has  helped 
to  give  them  a  stiffness  and  repulsiveness  of  manners 
towards  others,  and  has  made  them  less  friendly,  kind 
and  social  in  their  intercourse  with  men,  generally, 
than  they  otherwise  would  have  been.  He  who  takes 
up  the  notion  that  all  around  him,  excepting  the 
few  who  belong  to  the  church,  are  at  heart  enemies  to 
him  on  account  of  his  religion,  and  deserve  the 
characteristics  and  the  appellations  that  the  Apostles 
anciently  gave  to  the  Pagan  world,  and  that  to  himself 
also  belong,  on  account  of  his  moral  superiority,  all 
distinctive  titles  of  dignity  and  excellence,  which  were 
applied  in  part  to  the  circumstances  of  the  early 
Christians;  he  who  holds  these  views,  I  say,  cannot 
fail  to  have  his  amiableness  and  modesty  affected  by 
them.     He  may  think  that  all  men  are  his  enemies, 


226  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

and  he  may  treat  them  as  if  they  were  so ;  and  when 
they  testify,  as  they  well  m_ay,  their  displeasure  or 
their  ridicule,  at  his  forbidding  and  sanctimonious 
deportment,  he  may  think  himself  persecuted  for 
righteousness'  sake,  but  he  is  greatly  mistaken ! 

The  truth  is,  there  is  no  such  distinction  between 
the  church  and  the  world,  as  there  was  in  the  early 
age.  There  is  no  such  distinction  of  character,  as  the 
language  in  question  describes:  and  it  never  was 
designed  solely  to  describe  a  distinction  of  character, 
but  in  part  a  difference  of  circumstances,  a  difference 
of  religion,  of  privileges,  of  knowledge,  of  moral  advan- 
tages. Recollect  that  the  worst  churches,  that  the 
Corinthian  church,  amidst  all  its  shameful  disputes,  its 
more  shameful  vices,  and  its  awful  profanation  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  still  enjoyed  all  these  high  and  distinc- 
tive titles  of  superiority ;  and  you  must  conclude  that 
these  distinctions  were  in  part  ascribed  to  their  outward 
state.  Recollect  that  the  Jews,  in  the  worst  periods  of 
their  history,  were  still  "  a  chosen  people,  a  holy  nation," 
and  you  will  have  an  exemplification  of  the  same 
thing. 

The  world  in  the  times  of  the  apostles,  was  a  Pagan 
world,  and  was  emphatically  hostile  to  the  Christian 
church.  The  two  were  widely  and  visibly  distin- 
guished. It  is  true  indeed,  that  there  is,  and  ever  was, 
a  wide  distinction  between  good  and  bad  men.  And 
it  will  be  admitted  by  us  all,  I  presume,  that  there  is, 
at  this  day,  more  of  a  serious  purpose  and  endeavour 
to  lead  a  pious  life,  more  reading  and  studying  of  the 
Scriptures,  more  prayer  and  persevering  virtue,  within 
the  church  than  without  it.  And  much  were  it  to  be 
wished  that  it  were,  indeed,  more  distinguished  from 
the  spirit  of  the  world,  than  any  language  can  describe. 
But  as  the  case  really  and  unfortunately  is  ;  to  draw 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  227 

a  line  of  distinction,  and  to  say,  that  on  the  one  side, 
is  all  the  goodness  and  piety  in  the  world,  and  on  the 
other  none  at  all ;  this  is  more  than  modesty  would 
claim  on  one  part,  and  more  than  justice  ought  to 
admit  on  the  other.  And  yet,  all  the  outcry  there  is 
about  confounding  the  church  and  the  world,  is  sup- 
ported by  the  notion  of  such  a  distinction ;  is  supported, 
by  the  particular  and  local  and  circumstantial  repre- 
sentations that  belonged  to  the  apostolic  age. 

But  still  we  must  contend  that  there  is  a  world  to 
be  feared  ;  or  to  speak  more  accurately  there  is  a  spirit 
of  the  world  which  is  to  be  feared  ;  and  the  more  so, 
just  in  proportion  as  it  is  less  suspected.  We  are  not 
required  to  withdraw  from  the  general  intercourse  of 
society,  as  the  early  Christians  were  ;  we  have  to  do 
what  is  far  harder  ;  to  live  in  the  world,  and  yet  to  with- 
stand the  spirit  of  the  world.  When  the  Christian 
band  was  small  and  persecuted,  and  hemmed  in  by  a 
surrounding  and  hostile  community,  it  was  not  so  diffi- 
cult to  preserve  its  unity  and  good  fellowship  and 
consistency  of  character.  Then  there  was  a  visible 
and  formal  separation.  On  one  side  there  was  open 
hostility;  on  the  other,  unqualified  jealousy  and  dread. 

Now  what  we  have  to  fear  in  the  world  is  no  longer 
visible.  It  is  a  foe  in  ambush.  It  is  the  spirit  of  the 
world.  It  is  an  influence,  secret,  subtle,  insinuating, 
which  leads  us  captive  before  we  are  aware,  and  which 
leads  us,  not  to  martyrdom  but,  to  compliance.  Alas  ! 
(we  had  almost  said,)  it  does  not  bear  our  souls  on  the 
mounting  flame  to  heaven,  but  it  chains  and  fastens 
them  down  to  the  earth.  There  is  such  a  spirit, 
though  we  may  see  it  not,  that  is  more  to  be  dreaded 
than  the  arm  of  persecution.  There  is  a  spirit  of 
business,  absorbing,  eager,  over-reaching  ;  ungenerous 
and  hard  in  its  dealings,  keen  and  bitter  in  its  compe- 


228  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

titions,  low  and  earthly  in  its  purposes :  there  is  a 
spirit  of  fashion,  vain,  trifling,  thoughtless,  fond  of 
display,  dissipating  the  mind,  wasting  the  time,  and 
giving  its  chief  stimulus  and  its  main  direction  to  the 
life ;  there  is  a  spirit  of  ambition,  selfish,  mercenary, 
restless,  circumventing,  living  but  in  the  opinion  of 
others,  envious  of  others  good  fortune,  or  miserably 
vain  of  its  own  success  ;  there  is  a  spirit,  in  the  world 
of  business,  in  the  world  of  amusement,  in  the  world 
of  ambition,  which  is  to  be  dreaded.  Even  in  our  best 
employments,  there  is  something  to  fear.  There  is  a 
spirit  of  reading  merely  for  gratification ;  or  of  writing, 
for  credit ;  of  going  to  church  for  entertainment ;  of 
praying  with  formality  ;  and  of  preaching,  shall  I  say 
it?  of  preaching  with  selfish  aims,  which  is  to  be 
dreaded,  and  in  the  latter  case,  to  be  abhorred.  Ah !  my 
friends,  it  is  a  dangerous  world  that  we  live  in.  The 
best,  the  wisest,  the  purest  have  found  it  to  be  so.  To 
fall  into  the  wide-sweeping  current  of  its  influence  and 
to  be  borne  along  with  it,  may  be  easy,  may  be  plea- 
sant, but  it  is  not  safe.  There  is,  if  I  may  specify 
once  more,  there  is  a  spirit,  which  is  of  the  world,  a 
spirit  whose  low  habits  belong  to  this  world,  rather  than 
to  any  expectation  of  a  better,  whose  fears  and  hopes 
and  anxieties  are  all  limited  to  these  earthly  scenes, 
which  is  grasping  for  an  earthly  treasure  and  forgets 
the  heavenly ;  there  is  a  mind,  that  is  fascinated  and 
engrossed  by  things  seen  and  temporal,  and  indifferent 
to  things  unseen  and  eternal ;  there  is  a  prevailing 
forgetfulness  of  God,  there  is  an  insensibility  to  the 
worth  of  the  soul,  to  its  necessities  and  dangers,  to  the 
need  of  prayer  and  effort  to  guard  it  in  temptations 
and  to  guide  it  in  its  solemn  probation  for  the  future ; 
in  one  word,  there  is  a  pervading  spirit  of  religious 
indifference,  which  is  to  be  dreaded. 


USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  229 

In  the  external  habits  and  actions  of  hfe,  as  has 
been  aheady  said,  we  cannot  be  greatly  distinguished : 
but  there  is  a  harder  distinction  to  attain  ;  it  is  in  the 
internal  habits  of  the  mind.  In  this  respect  it  is,  that 
we  are  still  commanded  to  come  out  and  be  separate. 
In  this  respect  it  is  not  safe  for  us  to  live  as  the  world 
lives.  Nor  is  it  safe  for  us  to  live  carelessly  in  the 
world.  Not  only  is  the  moral  atmosphere  around  us 
infected,  but  we  breathe  it,  we  live  in  it,  and  it  presses 
us  on  every  side.  In  these  circumstances,  every 
solemn  admonition  of  the  Scripture,  relatmg  to  the 
world,  may,  in  the  spirit  of  it,  be  properly  applied  to  us 
at  this  day.  In  these  circumstances,  we  need,  as  men 
ever  have  needed  and  ever  will  need,  a  faith  that  over- 
comes the  world. 

On  the  whole,  let  us  remember,  that  although  the 
circumstances  of  the  early  revelation  have  passed 
away,  the  religion  itself,  has,  if  I  may  speak  so,  an 
everlasting  freshness  and  novelty.  There  was  some- 
thing in  the  instructions  of  the  apostles  that  was  appro- 
priate to  their  age  ;  but  all  that  is  essential  and  spiritual 
remain  for  us.  There  is  a  broad  basis  of  moral  truth ; 
there  is  an  everlasting  foundation,  on  which  the  men 
of  all  ages  may  stand.  Though  the  form  of  its  super- 
structure shows  the  architecture  of  the  age,  thouo-h 
some  of  its  former  appendages  on  which  Christians 
gazed  with  admiration,  have  fallen  off,  though  the 
burnished  dome  no  longer  kindles  in  the  first  splendours 
of  the  morning,  yet  the  mighty  temple  of  its  worship 
is  still  open  for  us  to  enter,  and  to  offer  the  lowly 
homage  of  our  devotion. 

In  fine,  though  the  form  and  the  costume  and  the 

aspects  of  circumstance  have  fallen  off,  with  the  signs 

and  wonders  of  the  early  age,  religion  is  but  presented 

to  uSj  in  a  more  sublime  and  spiritual  character.     And 

20 


230  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

our  progress  in  this  religion  will  be  marked  by  a  closer 
adherence  and  a  more  exclusive  regard  to  the  spirit 
and  essence  of  it,  and  a  less  concern  about  particular 
modes  of  phraseology  and  the  particular  forms  of  its 
exhibition.  We  shall  pass  through  the  intervening 
vails,  which  different  dispensations  and  different  ages, 
which  systematic  speculations  and  sectarian  prejudices 
have  thrown  around  it,  and  shall  approach  the  great 
reality.  We  shall  pass  through  the  rent  vail  of  the 
temple,  and  enter  "  the  holy  of  holies."  We  shall  thus 
make  our  progress  in  knowledge  and  devotion,  a  suit- 
able preparation  for  a  state  of  being  more  spiritual  and 
sublime ;  where  infirmity  shall  no  longer  need  forms 
to  support  it ;  nor  inquiry  guards  to  preserve  it ;  where 
different  systems  and  dispensations  shall  no  more  mis- 
lead, nor  prejudice,  nor  divide  us ;  but  there  shall  be 
one  eternal  conviction,  that  of  the  truth  :  and  one 
eternal  dispensation,  the  dispensation  of  the  spirit. 


ON    MIRACLES, 

PRELIMINARY  TO  THE  ARGUMENT  FOR  A  REVELATION. 

BEING  THE  DUDLEIAN  LECTURE  DELIVERED  BEFORE  HARVARD 
UNIVERSITY,  MAY,  1836. 


And  he  said  unto  them,  Why  are  ye  so  fearful  ?  How  is  it  that 
ye  have  no  faith  ?  And  they  feared  exceedingly,  and  said  one 
to  another.  What  manner  of  man  is  this,  that  even  the  wind 
and  the  sea  obey  him  ?— Mark  iv.  40,  41. 

The  power  of  Jesus  on  the  occasion  here  referred 
to,  was  undoubtedly  mhaculous.  Without  dweUing 
on  the  circumstances,  which  are  famihar  to  you,  I  wish 
to  call  your  attention  to  two  points  in  the  narrative,  as 
fairly  presenting  the  subject  of  my  present  discourse. 
One  is  the  natural  astonishment  of  the  disciples, 
amounting  almost  to  a  reluctance  to  believe  Avhat  their 
eyes  beheld.  "What  manner  of  man  is  this,  that  even 
the  wind  and  the  sea  obey  him  ?"  The  other  point, 
to  which  I  wish  to  draw  your  attention,  is  the  language 
of  rebuke  with  which  our  Saviour  addresses  this  feeling 
of  incredulity.  "  How  is  it  that  ye  have  no  faith  ?" 
And  I  may  add  that  he  frequently  reproaches,  in  similar 
terms,  the  want  of  faith  in  his  miraculous  powers. 

Now  it  is  this  presumption  against  miracles  ;  in  other 
words,  it  is  the  preliminary  ground  of  the  argument  for 
Christianity,  that  I  propose  in  this  discourse  to  examine. 
And  of  such  importance  do  I  hold  this  preliminary  view 
of  the  subject,  that  I  think  it  will  make  all  the  differ- 
ence, with  many  minds,  between  believing  in  Chris- 
tianity, and  not  believing.    That  is  to  say,  the  evidences 


230  USE    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

our  progress  in  this  religion  will  be  marked  by  a  closer 
adherence  and  a  more  exclusive  regard  to  the  spirit 
and  essence  of  it,  and  a  less  concern  about  particular 
modes  of  phraseology  and  the  particular  forms  of  its 
exhibition.  We  shall  pass  through  the  intervening 
vails,  which  different  dispensations  and  different  ages, 
which  systematic  speculations  and  sectarian  prejudices 
have  thrown  around  it,  and  shall  approach  the  great 
reality.  We  shall  pass  through  the  rent  vail  of  the 
temple,  and  enter  "  the  holy  of  holies."  We  shall  thus 
make  our  progress  in  knowledge  and  devotion,  a  suit- 
able preparation  for  a  state  of  being  more  spiritual  and 
sublime ;  where  infirmity  shall  no  longer  need  forms 
to  support  it ;  nor  inquiry  guards  to  preserve  it ;  where 
different  systems  and  dispensations  shall  no  more  mis- 
lead, nor  prejudice,  nor  divide  us ;  but  there  shall  be 
one  eternal  conviction,  that  of  the  truth  :  and  one 
eternal  dispensation,  the  dispensation  of  the  spirit. 


ON    MIRACLES, 

PRELIMINARY  TO  THE  ARGUMENT  FOR  A  REVELATION. 

B£IJVG  THE  DUDLEIAN  LECTURE  DELIVERED  BEFORE  HARVARD 
UNIVERSITY,  MAY,  1836. 


And  he  said  unto  them,  TVhy  are  ye  so  fearful  ?  How  is  it  that 
ye  have  no  faith  ?  And  they  feared  exceedingly,  and  said  one 
to  another.  What  manner  of  man  is  this,  that  even  the  wind 
and  the  sea  obey  him  ? — Mark  iv.  40,  41. 

The  power  of  Jesus  on  the  occasion  here  referred 
to,  was  undoubtedly  mkaculous.  Without  dwelHng 
on  the  circumstances,  which  are  famiUar  to  you,  I  wish 
to  call  your  attention  to  two  points  in  the  narrative,  as 
fairly  presenting  the  subject  of  my  present  discourse. 
One  is  the  natural  astonishment  of  the  disciples, 
amounting  almost  to  a  reluctance  to  believe  what  their 
eyes  beheld.  "What  manner  of  man  is  this,  that  even 
the  wind  and  the  sea  obey  him  ?"  The  other  point, 
to  which  I  wish  to  draw  your  attention,  is  the  language 
of  rebuke  with  which  our  Saviour  addresses  this  feeling 
of  incredulity.  "  How  is  it  that  ye  have  no  faith  ?" 
And  I  may  add  that  he  frequently  reproaches,  in  similar 
terms,  the  want  of  faith  in  his  miraculous  powers. 

Now  it  is  this  presumption  against  miracles  ;  in  other 
words,  it  is  the  preliminary  ground  of  the  argument  for 
Christianity,  that  I  propose  in  this  discourse  to  examine. 
And  of  such  importance  do  I  hold  this  preliminary  view 
of  the  subject,  that  I  think  it  Avill  make  all  the  differ- 
ence, with  many  minds,  between  believing  in  Chris- 
tianity, and  not  believing.    That  is  to  say,  the  evidences 


232  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

of  revelation  are  strong  enough  to  produce  belief,  if  it 
were  not  for  this  presumption  against  them.  Let  there 
be  no  prejudice  against  miracles  ;  let  it  appear,  in  any 
man's  account,  perfectly  reasonable  and  philosophical 
to  admit  them  ;  let  him  regard  it  as  extremely  probable 
that  the  Supreme  Being  would  interpose  for  our  spir- 
itual relief;  and  then  I  say,  that  he  must  feel  the 
evidence,  actually  offered,  to  be  ample  and  overwhelm- 
ing. It  is  not  from  the  weakness  of  the  proof,  but  from 
the  strength  of  the  presumption  against  it,  that  it  fails 
of  producing  conviction. 

That  there  is  this  presumption  against  miracles,  I 
hardly  need  say.  It  appears  in  many  forms.  There 
has  always  been  a  prejudice  of  this  nature  lurking  in 
the  bosom  of  science.  The  doctrine  of  philosophical 
necessity  seems  to  me  to  proceed  from  the  same  source, 
though  I  am  aware  that  its  advocates  do  not  deny  the 
Christian  attestation  to  those  facts  which  we  denomi- 
nate miraculous.  The  modern  system  of  German 
Rationalism  is  a  standing  and  recorded  proof  of  the 
same  presumption  against  miracles.  Nay,  with  some 
writers  this  presumption  has  amounted  to  an  assertion 
of  the  essential  incredibility  of  such  facts.*     And  where 

*  The  essentialin  credibility  of  miracles,  the  impossibility  indeed 
of  such  occurrences,  has  lately  been  argued  by  an  English  writer, 
the  author  of  "  Essays  on  the  Pursuit  of  Truth,"  in  the  Third  Essay. 
It  is  the  old  argument  of  Mr.  Hume  ;  but  it  is  presented  with  great 
clearness,  in  a  manner  at  once  very  calm  and  imposing,  and  without 
any  of  those  terms  that  would  indicate  its  purpose,  or  any  consid- 
eration of  the  answers  that  have  been,  and  may  be  given  to  it. 

The  course  of  the  author's  argument  is  as  follows.  In  the  first 
place,  he  maintains  that  all  reasoning,  belief  and  knowledge  depend 
on  the  uniformity  of  causation  ;  in  other  words,  upon  the  regular 
succession  of  antecedents  and  consequents.  That  most  of  them  do, 
is  doubtless  true.  We  could  not  anticipate  the  future  nor  interpret 
the  past,  but  upon  the  supposition  that  the  same  principles  have 
been,  and  will  be  in  operation,  that  are  now.     But  whether  there  is 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  233 

it  falls  short  of  this,  it  is  still  a  secret  reluctance  to 
receive  them.  And  I  think  this  reluctance  has  some 
unusual  developement  among  many  reflecting  persons 

no  other  basis  or  source  of  belief,  is  the  question.  Most  philoso- 
phers have  persuaded  themselves  that  the  world  had  a  beginning, — 
an  event  which  quite  breaks  in  upon  their  order  of  sequences. 

In  the  next  place,  the  author  maintains  that  our  belief  in  the 
uniformity  of  causation  is  instinctive,  original,  ultimate,  and  irre- 
sistible in  the  mind.  That  a  general  sense  of  preference  of  order  is 
so,  I  believe  ;  and  that  experience  working  upon  this,  or  without  it, 
must  create  a  very  strong  conviction  of  the  regularity  of  nature,  is 
obvious ;  but  whether  any  thing  more  than  this  is  true,  I  must 
doubt. 

But  I  am  willing  to  give  the  argument  the  benefit,  on  both  points, 
of  any  doubts  that  do  not  involve  a  begging"  of  the  question,  and 
come  at  once  to  the  conclusion.  The  question,  then,  of  miracles  is 
brought  to  the  point  of  conflicting  testimonies.  Nature,  on  the  one 
hand,  testifies,  it  is  said,  to  undeviating  regularity.  Change,  then, 
is  impossible.  Man's  testimony,  too,  is  valuable,  and  has  its  regu- 
larity as  truly  as  nature  ;  but  it  is  more  liable  to  be  mistaken,  or  we 
are  more  liable  to  mistake  its  marks,  and  therefore  it  can  never 
counterbalance  the  testimony  of  nature.  Therefore  a  miracle  is 
impossible  ;  and  the  belief  in  it,  absurd. 

This  argument  proves  too  much.  For  suppose  now  that  I  acqui- 
esce in  the  conclusion,  and  quietly  take  my  seat  in  this  pinfold  of 
philosophy,  what  does  this  argument  suppose  me  to  say  ?  Or  what 
does  the  skeptic  say,  who  strives  to  lift  his  head  high  enough  (but 
cannot)  above  the  machinery  of  causes,  to  declare  their  laws,  and 
processes,  and  bounds  ? 

In  the  first  place,  he  says  that  God  Almighty  either  ca/inof  change 
the  course  of  things,  though  he  should  please  to  do  it,  or  else  that 
He  will  not  please  to  do  it.  For  the  reader  will  observe,  that  such 
a  change  is  pronounced,  without  qualification,  impossible  !  To  know 
so  much  of  the  Omniscient  purpose, — to  know  so  little  of  the  Omni- 
potent power, — presents  a  solecism  in  which  it  is  difficult  to  tell 
whether  the  ignorance  or  the  presumption  is  the  most  extraordinary. 

In  the  second  place,  this  argument  would  prove  that  the  world 
and  the  universe  are  eternal.  They  could  never  have  begun,  they 
can  never  cease  to  exist ;  for  either  fact  would  be  a  deviation  from 
the  uniformity  of  causation.  In  the  one  case,  there  would  be  a 
consequent  without  any  regular  antecedent.  In  the  other,  an  ante- 
cedent without  any  regular  consequent.    Nay,  since  the  author  holds 

20* 


234  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

in  this  country,  at  the  present  moment.  It  is  seen  in 
the  disposition  of  many  to  turn  from  the  miracles  to 
what  they  call  the  internal  evidence.  It  is  not  uncom- 
mon in  society  to  hear  the  miracles  spoken  of  slightly. 
There  is  in  every  age,  a  fashion  of  thinking  ;  and  the 
fashion  of  thinking  at  the  present  day,  I  conceive,  is 
growing  more  and  more  adverse  to  these  primitive, 
peculiar,  and  hitherto  received  evidences  of  revelation. 
It  seems  to  be  thought  by  some,  that  the  day  has  gone 
by  for  talking  about  miracles ;  that  they  answered  a 
purpose  indeed  in  the  primitive  age,  but  have  no  longer 
any  use.     Not  a  few  are  saying,  "  Our  feelings  convince 

that  there  is  the  same  unchangeable  order  of  sequences  in  the  intel- 
lectual as  in  the  physical  world,  the  race  of  men  can  have,  in  this 
theory,  neither  beginning  nor  end.  In  short,  this  assumption  seems 
to  me  to  be  compatible  with  nothing  but  Atheism.  If  there  be  no 
Power  superior  to  nature,  none  that  can  interfere  with  its  processes, 
then  perhaps  it  is  fair  to  infer  that  its  processes  must  go  ou 
unchanged  and  unchangeable.  But  if  there  is  a  God,  the  possibility 
of  change  is  equal  to  his  power ;  it  is  unbounded  and  unques- 
tionable. 

In  the  third  place,  the  argument  proves  too  much,  because  it  goes 
beyond  all  reasonable  and  known  bounds  of  skepticism.  The  author 
who  says  to  his  fellow-men,  "  You  cannot  justly  believe  in  a  miracle  ; 
the  thing  is  impossible,  and  faith  is  impossible,"  transcends  the 
bounds  of  all  human  experience,  if  not  of  all  human  patience. 
Because  almost  all  men,  who  have  ever  lived,  have  believed  in 
miracles.  And  is  not  the  very  question  before  us,  in  fact,  a  question 
about  experience  .'  Could  all  men  have  believed  in  miracles,  if,  as 
our  author  contends,  an  original  and  fundamental  law  of  the  mind 
forbade  their  believing  in  them  .'  Is  it  not  as  unphilosophical,  as  it 
is  intolerable,  to  say  that  all  mankind  have  been  found  believing  in 
a  thing  which  is  plainly  impossible  .'  What  is  meant  by  its  being 
impossible  .'  That  God  cannot  perform  it .'  I  will  not  impute  to 
any  one  the  intentional  blasphemy  of  such  an  averment.  Is  it 
meant,  then,  that  it  is  impossible  that  we  should  believe  it  ?  But 
we  do  believe  it.  We  can  believe  it.  All  men  do  and  can  ;  all  but 
the  few,  the  very  few  who  agree  with  our  author.  Is  there  any 
remaining  idea,  then,  that  can  be  attached  to  the  word  impossible  1 
I  know  of  none. 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  235 

US,  that  Christianity  is  true ;  the  book  convinces  us 
that  it  is  true  ;  and  we  want  no  other  evidence."  It 
was  in  this  feehng,  obviously,  that  Coleridge  exclaimed. 
"  Evidences  of  Christianity  !  1  am  weary  of  the  word. 
Make  a  man  feel  the  Avant  of  it ;  rouse  him,  if  you  can, 
to  the  self-knowledge  of  his  need  of  it ;  and  you  may 
safely  trust  it  to  its  own  evidence."* 

That  this  way  of  thinking  is  unphilosophical,  that 
It  does  not  properly  perceive  the  very  ground  on  which 
it  professes  to  stand,  that  the  reluctance  to  receive 
miracles,  though  natural  and  reasonable,  to  a  certain 
extent,  is  unphilosophical  when  it  amounts  to  a  strong 
prejudice  or  presumption  against  them ;  nay  more,  that 
on  a  whole  view  of  the  case,  the  presumption  ought, 
in  fact,  to  be  the  other  ivay^  is  what  I  shall  now  attempt 
to  show. 

But  as  this  way  of  thinking  arises  in  part,  I  believe, 
from  a  misconception  of  the  place  which  mnacles 
properly  hold  in  the  Christian  system,  let  me  employ 
a  word  or  two  of  explanation  on  this  point.  A  man 
says,  that  he  cannot  regard  miracles  as  the  great  things 
in  Christianity,  since  he  assigns  that  place  to  its  doc- 
trines, and  precepts  and  spirit.  Neither  do  we  ask  him 
to  regard  miracles  as  the  great  things.  It  has  been 
well  said  of  the  miracles,  that  "  they  are  like  the  massive 
subterranean  arches  and  columns  of  a  huge  building. 
It  is  not  on  their  account  that  we  prize  the  building, 
but  the  building  for  its  own  sake.  We  do  not  think 
of  the  foundation  nor  care  about  it,  other  than  to  know 
that  it  has  one.  We  dwell  above  in  the  upper  and 
fairer  halls.  The  crowds  go  in  and  out,  and  rejoice  in 
their  comforts  and  splendours,  without  ever  casting  a 
thought  on  that  upon  which  the  whole  so  peacefully 

*  Aids  to  Reflection,  p.  245,  Amer.  ed. 


236  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

and  securely  reposes.  Such  are  the  mhacles  to  the 
gospel.  They  support  the  edifice,  and  upon  a  divine 
foundation.  They  show  us,  that  if  the  superstructure 
is  fail  and  beautiful  to  dwell  in,  and  if  its  towers 
and  endless  flights  of  steps  appear  to  reach  even  up 
to  heaven,  it  is  all  just  what  it  seems  to  be ;  for  it 
rests  upon  the  broad  foundation  of  the  Rock  of 
Ages."^ 

This  observation  will  apply,  perhaps,  to  the  case  of 
those  who  say,  that  they  do  not  feel  the  miracles  to  be 
necessary  to  their  faith  in  Christianity.  When  they 
say  this,  they  must  mean  by  faith,  that  moral  appre- 
hension of  the  spirit  and  power  of  Christianity,  that 
sense  of  the  spiritual  relief  and  comfort  that  it  brings, 
which  does  not,  it  is  true,  depend  on  miracles ;  in  other 
words,  that  view  of  the  superstructure  which  does  not, 
it  is  true,  immediately  depend  on  any  view  of  a  foun- 
dation. But  this  view  presupposes  a  speculative  or 
traditional  belief  in  the  Christian  Religion;  or,  if  it 
does  not,  then  it  is  just  like  a  faith  in  any  other  good 
writings ;  that  is,  simply  a  belief  that  they  are  good 
and  wise,  and  therefore  true;  and  if  true,  accordant 
with  the  will  of  God.  In  this  sense,  we  have  faith  in 
all  the  dictates  of  reason.  But  Christianity  we  receive 
as  a  special  revelation,  an  authoritative  record  of  God's 
wil] ;  and  in  this  character  it  must  have  some  attesta- 
tion beyond  its  general  consonance  with  our  rational 
or  moral  nature;  else  every  demonstration  in  the 
mathematics,  and  every  undisputed  principle  in  moral 
philosophy,  would  be  a  revelation.  That  attestation, 
I  say,  is  miracle. 

The  state  of  opinion  on  this  subject  makes  it  neces- 
sary, perhaps,  before  proceeding  farther,  that  I  should 

*  Rev.  William  Ware. 


THE    ARGUMENT    PROM    MIRACLES.  237 

define  the  word  ,mmde.  AH  Chiistians  of  whom  1 
know  any  thing,  in  this  country,  hold  to  muacles  m 
some  sense.  I  wish  distinctly  to  say  this ;  because  if 
the  sense  which  I  affix  to  this  word,  as  the  only  one 
satisfactory  to  myself,  is  not  received  by  others,  I  would 
by  no  means  leave  it  to  be  inferred,  that  there  is  any 
professed  difference  of  opinion  between  xis  as  to  the 
miraculous  origin  of  Christianity.  There  is  on  y  a 
friendly  question  between  us  about  the  meaning  which 
ought  to  be  assigned  to  this  word. 

What  then  is  a  miracle?     I  answer,  It  is  an  mtei-- 
ruption   or   ceasing   of  the   regular    and   estabhshed 
succession  of  events,  taking  place  in  connexion  with 
the  mission  of  a  person  professing  to  be  sent  from  God, 
and  designed  to  give  that  proof  of  his  mission.     I  say 
an  interruption  or  ceasing  of  the  regular  and  established 
succession  of  events,  and  that  for  a  specific  purpose. 
A  miracle  is  a  fact,  hke  to  which  nothing  ever  has 
occurred,  or  ever  will  occur  but  for  the  same  purpose. 
I  lay  stress  upon  its  being  a  simple  fact.     In  regard  to 
the  succession  of  events,  I  say  nothing  of  causation  or 
necessity,   of  which   we   know   nothing.     I   do   not 
conceive  that  one  event  compels  another,  as  the  cogs 
of  one  wheel  push  on  another  wheel.     I  take  the  bare 
facts.     Since  the  world  began  it  was  not  known  that  a 
blind  man  received  sight  at  a  word,  or  that  a  man  with 
a  broken  limb,  or  that  a  dead  body,  already  m  the  first 
stages   of   putrefaction,    instantly   and   at    a    word, 
recovered  vigour  and  activity.    Such  events,  we  say,  on 
certain  occasions,  and  for  certain   purposes,  without 
precedent,  without  parallel,  have  taken  place.     1  hey 
are  the  miracles.  ,     .  i 

Now  the  question  is,  What  is  the  fair  and  philo- 
sophical description  of  these  events?  On  this  point 
there  is  a  strong  reluctance  in  many  minds  to  admit 


238  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

that  there  was  any  thmg,  in  these  cases,  out  of  the 
course  of  nature  or  contrary  to  it;  any  interruption  of 
the  order  of  nature  or  suspension  of  its  processes,  or 
departure  from  its  regularity.  They  say,  that  there 
may  have  been  causes  in  nature  or  in  the  mind,  which, 
though  unknown  to  us,  are  sufficient  to  account  for  the 
results  in  question.  I  object  to  the  word  "causes,"  as 
implying  an  efficient  power  in  one  event  to  produce 
another,  of  which  we  knoAV  nothing.  And  therefore  I 
consider  the  word  "  interposition,"  though  proper  enough 
to  be  used  in  popular  discourse,  to  be  strictly  speaking 
unphilosophical,  since  it  implies  that  one  event  has  an 
inherent  power  to  produce  another,  and  conveys  the 
impression  of  a  hand  thrust  in  to  stay  the  event  that 
would  otherwise  take  place.  This  may  be  true,  but 
we  do  not  know  it.  We  come  then  to  the  bare  facts. 
And,  if  we  deal  with  facts  alone,  I  see  not  how  it  can 
be  denied  that  a  miracle  is  something  out  of  the  course 
of  nature,  and  contrary  to  it ;  an  interruption  of  its 
order,  a  suspension  of  its  processes.  On  this  point,  a 
distinction  is  sometimes  made  between  a  real  interrup- 
tion and  an  apparent  interruption ;  and  it  is  contended 
that  the  interruption  is  only  apparent.  But  in  speaking 
of  facts,  submitted  to  the  observation  of  our  senses,  it 
appears  to  me,  that  Ave  must  conceive  of  real  and 
apparent  as  the  same  thing.  That  is  to  say,  if  such  a 
fact  or  such  an  event,  as  one  of  the  Christian  miracles, 
never  appeared  before,  and  never  shall  appear  again 
but  at  the  intervention  of  some  divinely  commissioned 
agent,  then  it  is  a  real  departure  from  the  order  of 
nature, — that  is,  from  the  vmiversally  received  and 
known  order  of  events,  which  is  all  that  we  know  of 
the  order  of  nature.  In  other  words,  the  whole  thing 
is  a  peculiarity;  a  special  conjunction  of  events  for  a 
particular  purpose.     And,  for  myself,  I  certainly  feel 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  239 

none  of  this  strong  repugnance  to  the  idea  of  an  inter- 
rupted succession  of  events.  I  have  no  respect  for  the 
mechanical  order  of  nature,  that  makes  me  feel  as  if  it 
could  not  he  changed.  I  do  not  see  that  the  moral 
purpose  of  that  order  is  at  all  impaired  by  occasional 
departures  from  it.  Surely,  the  Almighty  Will  is  not 
bound  in  the  chains  of  fate,  or  of  nature,  or  by  the 
powers  of  nature.  I  am  unable  to  see,  why  the 
Infinite  Parent  may  not  change  the  course  of  his 
providence  for  the  benefit  of  his  children,  as  well  as  a 
human  parent  may  change  the  course  of  his  adminis- 
tration for  a  similar  purpose.  Not,  indeed,  that  it 
w  ould  be  an  unforeseen  expedient  with  the  Omniscient 
Ruler;  but  I  cannot  see  that  its  being  foreseen  alters 
at  all  the  state  of  the  facts. 

But  now  let  us  grant  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that 
the  miracles  are,  as  the  modern  interpreter  proposes  to 
consider  them,  only  seeming  miracles ;  only  apparent, 
not  real  interruptions  of  the  order  of  nature.  Would 
they  then  be  valid  evidence  of  revelation?  When 
Jesus  says,  "Peace,  be  still,"  the  winds  and  waves 
sink  to  an  instant  calm.  It  was  wonderful ;  it  appeared 
mh-aculous  ;  but  it  was  miraculous,  say  some,  only  to 
the  ignorance  or  misapprehension  of  the  observers. 
There  was  a  sudden  lulling  of  the  winds  and  waves, 
which  to  the  disciples,  seemed  miraculous.  Or  there 
were  causes  in  the  bosom  of  those  turbulent  elements, 
however  hidden  from  us,  which  produced  that  sudden 
calm ;  and  such  occurrences  may  yet  come  to  be  as 
well  known,  if  not  as  familiar,  as  any  of  the  pheno- 
mena of  nature.  But  then,  I  ask,  would  there  be  any 
evidence  of  a  special  divine  commission  ?  To  illustrate 
the  case,  let  us  make  a  supposition ;  or  let  us  take  a 
piece  of  real  history.  Soon  after  the  arrival  of 
Columbus  on  the  shore  of  the  New  World,  there  was 


240  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

an  eclipse  of  the  sun.  The  rude  inhabitants  had  never, 
perhaps,  remarked  such  an  event  before.  Columbus, 
for  a  certain  purpose,  informs  them  that  the  sun  will 
be  darkened,  and  he  predicts  the  precise  day,  and  hour, 
and  moment,  when  it  will  happen.  The  people  hold 
their  minds  in  suspense  till  the  hour  arrives,  and  then, 
Avitnessing  the  result,  they  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  Columbus  is  a  supernatural  being,  and  they 
reverence  him  as  such.  It  was  to  them  a  miracle. 
But,  in  after  times,  suppose  that  this  people,  or  their 
descendants,  should  study  astronomy.  What  then 
would  be  their  conclusion?  AVould  they  not  say, 
"  We  were  deceived  ?"  And  what  other  than  this 
could  be  ihe  conclusion,  if  it  should  at  length  be 
discovered,  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  belonged  to  the 
natural,  though  at  that  time  unknown,  order  of  events. 

But  let  us  see  now,  if  miracles,  in  the  sense  which 
I  contend  for,  do  not  inevitably  belong  to  the  Christian 
system.  Is  it  possible  that  those  who  originally  wit- 
nessed them  could  have  received  them  in  any  other 
light?  "We  never  saw  it  on  this  wise;  since  the 
world  began,  such  things  were  never  seen,"  is  their 
language.  If  all  this  belonged  to  the  order  of  nature, 
must  they  not  have  been  grossly  deceived ;  and  deceived 
too,  with  the  knowledge,  if  not  intention,  of  the  first 
teachers  of  Christianity  ? 

But  further  ;  is  there  an}^  one  branch  of  the  Christian 
evidences  that  does  not  involve  miracles  of  the  character 
contended  for  ?  Does  not  the  argument  from  prophecy, 
and  does  not  the  argument  from  the  early  spread  of 
Christianity,  clearly  proceed  on  this  ground  ?  In  the 
one  case,  more  than  the  natural  prescience  of  any 
human  mind  is  supposed  ;  in  the  other,  more  than 
any  known  powers  of  persuasion.  Nay,  do  not  the 
very  attempts   to  explain  away  miracles   still   leave 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  241 

unexplained  miracles,  unexplained  departures  from  the 
order  of  nature  ?  It  is  said  for  instance,  in  regard  to 
the  cases  of  the  sick  healed,  and  the  dead  raised  to  life, 
that  we  cannot  aver  that  the  powers  of  nature  were 
suspended  or  modified,  because  we  are  not  acquainted 
with  all  the  powers  of  nature ;  because  there  may 
have  been  a  secret  power  in  the  sick  or  the  dead  body 
suddenly  to  restore  it  to  health  or  life.  But,  granting 
this,  still  the  knowledge  of  the  exact  time  when  that 
event  was  to  happen  must  have  been  miraculous. 
Let  us  take,  for  example,  the  miracle  recorded  in  our 
text.  Our  Saviour  arose  and  rebuked  the  wind  and 
the  sea,  and  there  was  a  great  calm.  Will  it  be 
pretended  by  any  honest  believer  in  Christianity,  that 
Jesus  acted  upon  a  very  sagacious  judgment  with 
regard  to  the  signs  of  the  weather  ?  Surely  not.  The 
only  tolerable  supposition  of  him  who  receives  Christi- 
anity, but  rejects  the  miracles,  is  that  there  were 
powers  in  nature,  though  beyond  human  penetration, 
which  produced  that  sudden  calm.  But  then,  it  is 
necessary,  I  repeat,  to  suppose  a  miraculous  knowledge 
in  him,  who  discerned  either  that  power,  or  the  moment 
of  its  operation.  Or,  if  any  one  should  say  that  there 
are  powers  in  the  mind^  with  which  we  are  unac- 
quainted, and  if  he  should  maintain  a  natural,  moral 
connexion  between  the  mind  of  him  who  spake  and 
that  sinking  of  the  winds  and  waves,  then,  I  shoidd 
say,  granting  an  action  so  entirely  gratuitous  and  so 
utterly  inconceivable — that  such  instances  occurring 
once,  and  never  afterwards,  were  themselves  miracles. 
If  that  were  not  a  miraculous  effect  of  mind  on  matter, 
we  ous^ht  to  see  somethino^  of  it  still. 

Miracle,  then,  holds  its  place  in  every  honest  expla- 
nation of  the  external  evidences  of  Christianity  :  and 
I  think  the  same  is  true  of  the  internal  evidence. 
21 


242  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

With  regard  to  this  branch  of  the  argument,  various 
and  vague  impressions  are  prevaiUng  which  seem  to 
me  to  possess  no  weight  whatever,  as  furnishing 
substantive  proof  They  may  be  useful  prehminaries 
or  auxiharies  to  conviction,  but  they  are  not  its  foun- 
dations. Such  are  the  ideas  that  are  entertained  of 
the  moral  charm  and  beauty  of  the  Scriptures,  or  of 
their  adaptation  to  human  wants ;  not  to  mention  those 
enthusiasts,  who  profess  to  have  a  secret  and  intuitive 
perception  of  the  divinity  of  those  w^ritings.  But, 
granting  the  singular  moral  beauty  and  charm  of  the 
Scriptures,  I  see  not  how  it  constitutes  proof  Sup- 
pose that  a  person  had  never  heard  of  a  revelation, 
and,  seeking  light  and  rest  for  his  mind,  were  to  take 
up  some  of  the  writings  of  Fenelon.  Would  he  not 
feel  the  same  kind  of  impression  ?  Would  he  not  be 
charmed  with  their  beauty,  and  their  adaptation  to 
his  necessities,  and  say,  "  This  is  just  what  I  wanted  ; 
this  must  be  the  truth  of  God."  And  would  he  not 
very  justly  say  this  ?  What,  then,  would  be  the 
distinction  between  the  writings  of  Fenelon  and  the 
records  of  inspiration  ?  There  is  a  difference  between 
truth  and  revealed  truth.  A  thing  may  be  true,  whe- 
ther it  is  revealed  or  not ;  nay,  it  must  be  true  inde- 
pendently of  that  consideration.  But,  Is  it  revealed  to 
be  true  ?  is  the  question ;  and  that  question  is  over- 
looked in  this  view  of  the  internal  evidences.  So  in 
the  writings  of  the  "divine  Plato"  the  reader  will  be 
amazed  and  charmed  with  the  elevation,  the  exqui- 
site moral  discrimination  and  beauty  of  some  of  his 
thoughts ;  but  will  this  prove  that  they  are  inspired  ? 
Indeed,  it  must  be  confessed,  I  think,  that  there  is  not 
one  moral  precept  of  the  New  Testament,  but  it  may 
be  found  in  the  old  heathen  philosophers. 

The  only  valid  internal  evidence  which  the  New 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  243 

Testament  contains  of  being  a  revelation,  is  found  in 
the  proposition,  that  these  writings  possess  altogether 
a  character,  for  which  nothing  but  special  divine  illu- 
mination can  account.  If  some  rustic  youth  should 
come  to  you  with  Newton's  Principia  in  his  hand,  and 
satisfy  you  that  he  was  its  author,  the  fact  would  not 
be  more  astonishing,  than  it  is  that  the  fishermen  of 
Galilee  should  have  produced  such  a  book  as  the  New 
Testament.  The  character  of  Jesus  is  itself  a  moral 
miracle.  This  is  evidence  :  and  it  will  be  more  and 
more  convincing,  as  we  more  and  more  clearly  under- 
stand the  nature  of  moral  phenomena,  the  power  of 
moral  prejudice,  and  the  difficulty  of  moral  progress. 

Still  then,  I  find  miracle  in  every  species  of  satis- 
factory and  substantive  proof  And  now  I  would 
ask,  if  there  is  any  conceivable  and  sufficient  evidence 
of  revelation,  but  miracles  ?  Suppose  a  man  to  stand 
before  you  and  to  say,  "  I  am  the  bearer  of  a  special 
communication  from  God."  What  would  you — what 
must  you  ask  of  him,  as  the  credentials  of  his  mission  ? 
His  air  might  be  noble,  his  doctrine  excellent,  his  speech 
divine.  His  communication  might  thrill  you  with  awe, 
or  with  rapture.  Would  that  satisfy  you  ?  If  you 
were  an  enthusiast,  it  might ;  but  if  you  were  a  phi- 
losopher, I  am  sure  it  would  not.  He  might  tell  you 
things  which  above  all  things  you  wished  to  know. 
He  might  tell  you,  as  Swedenborg  has  professed  to  do, 
of  the  very  state  of  the  blest  who  have  departed  from 
you,  and  of  your  own  future  state,  how  you  were  to 
live  in  that  unknown  world  ;  and  you  might  wish  to 
believe  it.  What  could  make  you  beUeve  it  ?  I  can 
conceive  of  but  one  thing, — a  miracle.  If  he  came 
from  an  earthly  monarch,  you  would  demand  his  cre- 
dentials ;  the  signet  ring,  or  the  sign  manual.  The 
chosen  seal  of  the  Almighty  Monarch  is  miracle  ! 


244  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

But  I  hear  it  said,  "  Could  you  receive  a  communi- 
cation as  from  heaven,  if  it  were  evidently  of  bad  ten- 
dency ?  And  if  not,  then  is  not  the  excellence  of  the 
communication  a  part  of  the  evidence?"  I  answer, 
No  ;  it  is  only  something  presupposed  in  a  case  ;  not 
the  proof  that  makes  out  the  case.  If  a  man  under- 
takes to  prove  any  thing  to  me,  he  must  undertake  to 
prove  something  that  is  credible.  I  cannot  listen  to 
him  but  upon  that  condition.  It  would  be  incredible. 
— a  case  not  to  be  supposed  nor  argued  upon,  that  the 
Almighty  had  sent  to  me  a  communication  of  evil 
tendency.  I  demand  this  condition  then,  that  the 
message  be  good,  but  the  condition  is  not  the  proof. 
That  a  thing  is  credible  is  necessary  to  its  being  cred- 
ited :  but  the  credibility  of  a  thing  is  not  to  be  con- 
founded with  the  belief  of  it.  The  former  is  one  of 
the  postulates ;  the  latter  is  the  conclusion.  They 
are  completely  distinct.  Thus  the  lawyer,  who  argues 
in  behalf  of  his  client  to  a  jury,  must  make  a  case  that 
is  credible  ;  but  the  credibility  is  no  part  of  the  argu- 
ment. And  the  juror  who  should  say,  "  I  was  con- 
vinced by  the  internal  likelihood  of  the  case,  and  not 
by  the  witnesses  nor  by  the  arguments,"  would  be 
thought  a  very  bad  reasoner,  however  well-disposed  a 
man. 

I  have  dwelt  longer  on  this  point  than  I  wished ; 
but  it  seemed  to  me  important  to  show,  if  it  be  true, 
that  Christianity  is  really  founded  on  miracles,  and 
that  all  attempts  to  escape  from  them  in  the  matter  of 
revelation  are  vain,  and  are  especially  proved  to  be 
vain  by  the  very  efforts  to  explain  them  away,  to 
which  their  rejectors  are  driven. 

But  now  let  us  examine,  in  as  few  words  as  may 
suffice,  that  presumption  against  miracles  from  which 


THE    AKGUMENT   FROM    MIRACLES.  245 

these  efforts  have  apparently  risen,  and  see  whether 
the  presumption  ought  not  in  fact  to  be  the  other  way. 
And,  first  of  all,  I  must  beseech  the  mquirer  to  ap- 
proach this  subject  in  the  purest  spirit  of  philosophy. 
It  is  the  constant  suggestion  of  unbelief,  that,  to  sup- 
port the  argument  for  a  revelation,  P/ejud'ce  is  neces- 
sarv     Now  I  say,  that  is  precisely  the  aid  that  we  do 
not  want.     Nay  more,  I  say  that  prejudice  is  the  very 
obstacle,  and  the  main  obstacle,  to  true  faith.     1  ask 
the  skeptic  to  lay  aside  his  prejudices.     I  ask  him  to 
be  a  philosopher;  and  yet  more  dj^^^y  ^  7' ^ 
philoLpher  of  the  inductive  school.     Let  him  rea  or^ 
upon  facts.     Let  him  take  nothing  for  granted.     Let 
him  assert  nothing  which  he  does  not  know;    and 
deny  nothing  which,  for  all  that  he  knows,  may  be 


true. 


Now  let  us  see  how  much  is  cut  off  from  the  ground 
of  this  inquiry  by  these  discriminatioiis  You  are  not 
to  deny  the  possibility  of  miracles.  Evidently  he  who 
made  and  who  controls  all  things,  can  modify  and 
change  them  if  it  be  his  pleasure.  The  act  of  creation 
is  but  the  grandest  of  miracles.* 

'^Z  t™*.     The  aet^.  *e  c.a.»  -  ^J-- »/ ^I 

nifonof  a  ^''f;^7^^^'\ZLsion.     The  point  of  departure 
none  the  less  miracle,  for  the  -K"!-"^  '^^'^  f/^^^e  a  retrograde 

=riL-ritt  tarr::^- ^';eS:the  porm  of 

21* 


246  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

Again,  you  are  not  to  say  or  suppose,  that  there  is 
any  difficuUj^  in  the  performance  of  miracles,  or  that 
it  requires  any  extraordinary,  or  any  new  exertion  of 
divine  power  to  produce  the  changes  in  question.  You 
do  not  know  but  that  every  event  in  the  universe 
springs  from  an  immediate  exertion  of  divine  power, 
and,  therefore,  that  one  result  is  as  naturally  and 
easily  produced,  as  another.  In  other  words,  you  are 
not  at  liberty  in  the  spirit  of  true  philosophy,  to  regard 

change  would  be  miracle,  and  none  the  less  miracle  for  the  regu- 
larity that  followed.  And  surely  it  would  be  no  less  a  miracle,  if  a 
world  were  suddenly  created  ;  if  solid  matter  instantly,  at  a  word, 
filled  the  void  space,  and  were  launched  forth  upon  its  mighty 
career.  All  the  difference  in  the  cases,  with  reference  to  the  point 
in  hand,  is  made  by  an  unphilosophical  idea  of  causes  :  as  if  there 
were  a  tendency  in  antecedents  to  produce  their  consequents  ;  a 
pushing  on  of  one  event  by  another  ;  of  which  we  know  nothing. 
And  yet  even  then  we  might  say,  that  there  were  causes  in  that 
void  space  to  keep  it  void,  and  that  those  causes  were  arrested  by 
the  creative  act  which  filled  that  space  with  matter. 

When  life  is  communicated  to  a  dead  body,  what  is  that  but  the 
creation  of  life  .'  Suppose  that  a  human  being  were  instantly  cre- 
ated before  our  eyes,  in  full  size  and  strength,  would  not  that  be 
just  as  great  a  deviation  from  the  usual  and  natural  course  of  pro- 
duction, as  it  is  to  raise  a  dead  body  to  life  ? 

I  have  supposed,  in  another  part  of  the  Discourse,  a  world  to  be 
created  in  our  sight.  But,  to  present  a  more  palpable  case,  and 
one  directly  beneath  our  eyes,  suppose  that,  as  we  were  looking 
upon  a  barren  and  blasted  heath,  it  were  suddenly  covered  with  a 
crop  of  grain,  ripe  for  the  harvest.  That  would  be  creation,  and 
that  would  be  a  miracle.  And  if  we  and  many  more  saw  that  mi- 
racle, and  knew  moreover  that  it  was  wrought  in  attestation  of  a 
divine  commission;  nay  more,  if  we  harvested  the  grain,  and 
ground  and  ate  it,  it  would  not  only  be  philosophical  to  believe, 
but  impossible  to  doubt.  Thus,  if  I  may  speak  so,  did  the  Christian 
witnesses  handle  the  evidence  of  the  miracles  they  record. 

But  I  am  not  now  to  pursue  this  argument  beyond  the  point  which 
is  immediately  before  me,  to  wit,  the  credibility  of  miracles.  And 
for  this  credibility,  on  the  strictest  grounds  of  philosophy,  I  say  that 
the  fact  of  creation  is  a  sufficient  warrant. 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  247 

nature  as  a  piece  of  mechanism  ;  as  a  clock,  for  in- 
stance, which  is  wound  up  and  has  a  natural  or  ne- 
cessary tendency  to  run  down.  And  you  are  not  to 
say,  that  the  need  of  a  miracle  to  answer  the  purposes 
of  the  Author  of  nature  implies  some  imperfection  in 
the  machinery  of  nature.  The  idea  of  machinery  is 
a  pure  assumption.  Des  Cartes  might  as  well  have 
argued  from  those  vortices,  or  whirlpools  of  ether,  by 
which  he  supposed  the  heavenly  bodies  were  moved, 
as  we  may  argue  from  the  notion  of  any  other  mech- 
anism. Once  more  ;  all  ideas  of  miraculous  interfe- 
rence, as  if  it  were  derogatory  to  the  Infinite  Being, 
all  presumptions  on  this  point,  drawn  from  the  infinity 
of  the  universe,  and  the  comparative  insignificance  of 
the  earth  and  of  man,  are  to  be  laid  out  of  the  ques- 
tion as  entirely  unphilosophical. 

With  these  reasonable  disclamations  then,  we  come 
to  the  simple  and  unprejudiced  experience  of  facts. 
We  see  an  order  in  nature,  not  mechanical,  not  neces- 
sary, but  appointed.  Can  that  order  be  changed? 
Doubtless  it  can.  To  assert  the  impossibility  of 
change,  is  to  go  far  beyond  our  province.  The  power 
that  ordained  the  succession  of  events,  can  modify 
them.  Has  the  order  of  nature  been  in  any  instance 
interrupted  ?  That  is  the  great  question.  I  am  not 
now  to  discuss  it.  I  have  only  to  ask,  if  that  question 
may  not  be  fairly  entertained:  if  it  is  not  open  to 
argument ;  if  witnesses  may  not  be  called  to  testify ; 
and  if  we  are  not  bound  to  listen  to  them  without 
setting  up  any  bar  of  presumption  against  their 
testimony.  Certainly,  if  there  is  no  intrinsic  and  ascer- 
tained impossibility  in  the  events  alleged  to  have 
taken  place,  we  are  bound  to  listen. 

But  in  what  spirit  shall  we  listen?  With  an 
extreme  and  almost  insurmountable  prejudice  against 


248  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

miracles  ?  This  is  the  assumption  of  unbeUef.  And 
on  what  is  this  assumption  founded  ?  "  On  experience/' 
is  the  answer.  And  what  now  is  this  boasted  experi- 
ence? Is  human  experience  the  measure  of  divine 
power?  Can  a  Umited  experience  set  bounds  to  possi- 
bihty  ?  What  is  this  hfe's  experience,  but  a  childhood 
amidst  the  ages  of  eternity?  Suppose  that  Ave  were 
hereafter  to  be  placed,  for  the  correction  of  some  mental 
errors,  in  a  scene  of  being  where  all  should  be  miracle, 
all  change;  w^here  every  thing  should  reveal  the 
immediate  action  of  the  Almighty  Power.  Where 
would  be  experience  then  ?  Or,  to  illustrate  the  same 
point,  let  us  revert  to  the  truly  philosophical,  the 
primitive,  experience.  Suppose  that  the  first  man  had 
been  created  before  the  heavens  were  spread  forth,  or 
the  earth  hung  in  the  empty  space,  and  that  he  had 
beheld  those  awful  effects  of  Omnipotence.  Would  he, 
at  the  close  of  the  first  day  of  his  existence,  find  it 
diflicult  to  believe  in  miracles  ?  Why  then,  should  the 
experience  of  forty  years,  amidst  regular  successions 
of  events,  make  him  forget  that  miracles  might  again 
be  a  part  of  the  course  of  nature?  The  experience 
that  makes  a  man  feel  as  if  there  could  be  no  more 
miracles,  seems  to  me  narrow,  and  if  I  may  say  so, 
provincial ;  like  that  which  makes  an  ignorant  and 
home-bred  rustic  feel  as  if  every  thing  in  the  great 
world  must  be  just  like  what  he  had  seen  in  his 
father's  house,  and  fills  him  with  astonishment, 
amounting  to  incredulity,  at  every  thing  new  and 
extraordinary. 

What  is  the  spirit  of  a  real  and  studious  philosophy, 
in  cases  which,  so  far  as  the  facts  are  considered,  are 
precisely  analagous  to  miracles.  An  extraordinary, 
unheard  of,  and  before  unknown  fact  is  presented  in 
nature.    Water,  for  instance,  is  produced  by  the  intense 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  249 

before  he  will  believe,  till  he  can  resolve  tl^at  fact  «to 
some  order  of  nature?     By  rro  means.     The  fact  has 
been  submitted  to  the  test  of  «-P-"™«';„^"t^;^  ^ 
satisfied.     And  he  believes  it,  let  me  add  not  because 
t  tlongs  to  any  order  of  things,  ^^^  ^---^^^^J 
been  proved  by  satisfactory  expernnents     1  he  l^mg 
o  Siam  would  not  believe,  that  the  ^'d  and  A^wmg 
water  could  become  a  soUd  body  under  hrs  feet     He 
took  the  very  ground  of  the  skeptic  about  miracles^ 
H  had  never'se'en  water  frozerr    -body  m  hrs  -^^ 
had  ever  seen  it;  and  he  would  not  believe    t.^ 
that  the  ground  of  philosophy  or  oim»^^'^\f^^ 
says,  that  he  cannot  and  will  not  beheve  m  m  racle^ 
And  vet  every  object  in  the  universe  around  him,  had 
t  oKn   in^   miracle.     And  suppose  that  it  wei^ 
g- r  us  again  to  witness  such  displays   o    powe. 
Suppose  that  another  sun  were  "eated   and  placed 
in  the  heavens  before  our  very  eyes.     Should  we  not 
bel  eve  the  fact  tUl  we  perceived  that  it  -as  produced 
by  some  preexisting,    world-making  machinery    of 
IZ,     And  yet  I  verily  believe  ^at  that  won  J^^^^ 
creation  would  not  be  more  ext.aordina  y    han  to^he 
discriminating  moral  eye  is  that  great  Light  which 
bu"on  the  darkness  of  the  world,  eighteen  centu- 

"Tthen,  the  strong  and  almost  insuperable  presump- 
tior^' agaikst  the  doctrine  of  miracles,  which  many 
f^el,  is'not  justified  by  a  strict  philosophy,  let  us  now 

Tarn  :£gt  concede  something  to  this  presump- 
tioin  wish  to  give  it  all  the  weight  that  it  deserves , 


252  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

or  the  air,  or  the  earth.  If  we  had  seen  any  species 
of  beings  in  this  situation  ;  if,  for  example,  every  sum- 
mer should  bring  into  existence  a  certain  kind  of 
bird,  for  which  there  was  no  suitable  provision,  or  no 
guiding  instinct ;  if  we  should  see  them  flying  about 
us,  as  if  uncertain,  destitute,  and  suffering,  with  wild 
screams  testifying  their  anxiety  and  distress,  appa- 
rently ignorant  whether  the  night  or  the  day  was  ap- 
pointed for  them,  now  rising  in  the  air,  now  plunging 
into  the  water,  and  then  madly  dashing  against  the 
earth  ;  if,  I  say,  we  had  thus  seen  them  holding  a 
precarious  and  painful  existence  for  a  few  weeks,  and 
then  miserably  perishing,;  we  should  feel  as  if  such 
a  phenomenon  was  most  extraordinary  and  astonish- 
ing ;  at  Avar  with  the  whole  system  of  nature,  and 
with  all  the  proofs  of  divine  benevolence.  We  do  un- 
hesitatingly pronounce  the  facts  embraced  in  such  a 
supposition  impossible.  If  we  were  to  study  nature 
for  ever,  we  should  never  expect  to  meet  with  any 
thing  like  this. 

Now  I  apply  this  to  the  case  of  human  nature. 
And  I  desire  you  to  suspend  your  judgment  of  the 
comparison  for  one  moment  till  I  can  fully  lay  it  before 
you.  Consider,  in  the  first  place,  the  dignity  of  the 
being,  to  illustrate  whose  condition  this  comparison  is 
brought.  Consider  all  the  difference  between  animal 
sense,  and  a  being  so  "infinite  in  faculties"  as  man. 
Suppose,  in  the  next  place,  that  this  being,  according 
to  an  unquestionable  law  of  his  nature,  should  improve 
his  faculties  to  the  highest  degree  conceivable,  without 
the  knowledge  of  a  future  life.  And  finally,  suppose 
him,  with  all  the  craving  wants,  the  soaring  aspira- 
tions, and  the  exquisite,  varied  and  multiplied  sorrows 
of  refined  thought  and  feeling,  to  stand  upon  the 
earth,  as  it  rolled  in  silence  through  the  mighty  void 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  253 

of  heaven, — with  death  all  around  him,  and  without 
one  voice  from  beyond  the  realms  of  visible  life  to 
assure  him  that  he  should  live  hereafter, — and  then 
say,  whether  this  would  not  be  a  condition  more 
mournful,  more  disastrous,  more  at  war  with  the  order 
of  divine  beneficence,  than  any  catastrophe  that  ever 
could  befall  animal  natures. 

If  any  one  distrusts  this  comparison,  I  must  beg 
leave  to  doubt  whether  he  fairly  comprehends  it.  The 
truth  is,  that  all  the  world  has  held  to  revelations  in 
one  form  or  another.  By  communications  direct  or 
traditional,  by  the  voice  of  augurs  or  of  prophets,  by 
open  miracle  or  inward  light,  all  mankind  have  deemed 
themselv^es  to  have  special  guidance  from  above. 

It  is  an  important  inference  from  this  fact,  that  no 
one  can  very  well  estimate  the  case  of  supposed  utter 
destitution  ;  and,  therefore,  that  it  is  extremely  difiicult 
for  any  individual  to  feel  the  whole  and  legitimate 
force  of  this  argument.  Every  man  has  been  trained 
up  from  childhood  by  a  system  of  communications ; 
and  now,  upon  the  very  strength  of  these  communica- 
tions, or  of  the  convictions  they  have  inevitably 
inspired,  he  deems  himself  able  to  stand  without  them. 
But  difficult  as  the  task  is  made  by  the  unfair  position 
of  the  objector,  I  shall  oflfer  two  or  three  observations, 
in  close,  tending  to  show  the  need,  and  therefore  the 
likelihood,  instead  of  the  often  alleged  improbability, 
of  an  extraordinary  revelation. 

Leaving  other  communications  out  of  the  account, 
then,  we,  as  Christians,  say  that  about  eighteen  cen- 
turies ago,  at  a  period  at  once  of  unprecedented  intel- 
lectual development  and  equally  prevailing  skepticism, 
there  appeared  an  extraordinary  teacher  from  heaven. 
I  am  not  now  to  offer  any  of  the  arguments  for  his 
divine  mission,  that  seem  to  me  so  abundant  and 
22 


254  THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES. 

overwhelming ;  but  I  think  I  am  fully  entitled  by  the 
circumstances  to  say,  that  there  ought  to  be  no  pre- 
sumption against  it.  For  it  is  undeniable,  that,  amidst 
all  the  lights  of  Grecian  and  Roman  civilization,  the 
most  important  truths, — the  unity  and  paternity  of 
God,  and  the  immortality  of  man, — were  obscured ; 
and  it  is  but  a  reasonable  inference,  that  without  a 
revelation,  they  would  have  been  overshadowed  with 
doubt  till  now.  And  even  the  belief  that  prevailed  in 
the  minds  of  a  few  philosophers,  seems  to  me  singu- 
larly to  have  wanted  vitality.  There  is  more  reason- 
ing than  conviction  apparent  in  their  discourses  ;  and 
certainly  their  faith  had  but  little  influence  on  their 
lives.  Cicero,  we  know,  and  others,  amidst  all  their 
hopes,  had  strong  doubts.  And  I  maintain,  not  only 
fi-om  these  examples,  but  from  the  experience  of  every 
powerful  mind  since,  that  no  reasonings  can  relieve 
that  great  question  from  painful,  from  distressing 
uncertainty. 

My  argument,  then,  is  from  human  experience,  and 
from  cultivated  human  experience.  It  is  easy  to  see, 
that  a  rude  age  might  less  need  the  relief  which  a 
revelation  on  this  point  would  give  ;  and  for  this  rea- 
son, as  I  hold,  to  rude  ages  it  was  not  given.  My 
argument,  then,  is  from  cultivated  human  experience. 
And  this  is  the  form  into  which  it  resolves  itself.  God 
is  the  author  of  life,  and  the  former  of  the  mind.  It  is 
fair  to  presume,  that  he,  who  has  provided  for  the 
wants  of  the  humblest  animal  life,  would  not  doom 
the  noblest  creature  he  has  made  on  earth,  to  over- 
whelming despondency  and  misery.  Noav  I  say,  that, 
without  a  revelation,  this  result  is  inevitable.  I  main- 
tain, that  no  scheme  of  a  virtuous,  improving  and 
happy  hfe  can  be  made  out,  which  leaves  the  doctrines 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  255 

of  God's  paternal  and  forgiving  mercy,  and  of  human 
immortality,  in  great  and  serious  doubt. 

My  friends,  I  bring  home  the  case  to  myself,  and  to 
you.  I  know  what  it  is  to  doubt,  and  I  say  that  no 
man  should  judge  of  the  effect  of  that  doubt,  till  he 
knows  by  experience  what  it  is ;  till,  crushed  by  its 
Aveight,  he  has  laid  himself  down  to  his  nightly  rest, 
too  miserable  and  desperate  to  care  whether  he  ever 
raised  his  head  from  that  pillow  of  repose  and  oblivion  ; 
till  every  morning  has  waked  him  to  sadness  and  des- 
pondency darker  than  the  gloomiest  night  that  ever 
clouded  the  path  of  earthly  sorrow.  It  is  not  calamity, 
it  is  not  worldly  disappointment,  it  is  not  affliction,  it 
is  not  grief,  that  I  speak  of ;  nor  is  it  any  of  these  that 
gives  the  greatest  intensity  to  this  doubt ;  it  is  a  devel- 
opment of  our  own  nature  ;  it  is  the  soul's  own  strug- 
gling with  the  mighty  powers  with  which  it  is  made 
to  grapple  ;  it  is  the  longed-for  and  almost  felt  immor- 
tality, struck  from  our  eager  grasp ;  the  light  gone 
out ;  the  heaven  of  our  hope  all  overshadowed  and 
dark.  Yes,  it  is  the  consciousness  of  infinite  desires 
and  capacities,  all  blighted  and  broken  down  ;  it  is  the 
aspiring  which  suns  and  stars  cannot  bound,  all  shrunk 
and  buried  in  a  coffin  and  a  grave  !  In  short,  it  is  the 
proper  and  legitimate  state  of  a  mind  following  the 
premises  of  the  case  to  their  just  result ;  and  not  that 
worldly  condition  of  the  mind,  which  is  no  more  fit  to 
judge  of  this  subject  than  childhood  is  to  judge  of  the 
interests  of  an  empire.  And  now  I  say.  Is  it  hard  to 
believe  that  God  would  interpose  for  humanity,  so  cir- 
cumstanced ?  Is  it  incredible  that  he  should  send  a 
voice  into  that  deep  and  dark  struggle  for  spiritual  life 
and  hope  ? 

I  appeal  to  you^  my  brethren.  I  appeal  to  the  youth 
who  are  before  me.     It  is  thought  that  this  age  is  wit- 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  MIRACLES. 


nessing  an  unusual  development  of  infidel  principles. 
One  whole  nation,  indeed,  has  fallen  a  victim  to  them. 
And  what  is  new  and  striking,  it  is  said,  has  a  kind  of 
fascination  for  youth.  But  I  hold  that  this  is  an  age, 
too,  which  is  witnessing  an  extraordinary  development 
of  sensibility  in  the  young.  This  arises  from  an  ear- 
lier, I  had  almost  said,  a  premature  education  ;  from 
an  exciting  literature  ;  and  from  the  character  of  enter- 
prise and  expectation  which  now  invests  all  the  inter- 
ests and  prospects  of  society.  But  I  ask,  Is  this  an 
age  when  you  can  safely  break  the  great  bond  of  faith 
and  hope  ?  If  yours  were  a  dull  and  sluggish  youth, 
or  a  youth  amidst  rude  and  barbarous  times,  it  might 
not  yield  me  the  argument  which  I  now  seek.  But  I 
know  that  in  this  age,  ay,  and  in  this  assembly,  there 
is  many  a  youthful  heart,  whose  daily  experience  is 
the  strongest  possible  proof  of  the  need,  and  therefore 
of  the  likelihood,  of  a  divinely  sanctioned  religion. 
Ay,  I  know,  and  many  a  sorrowing  parent  in  this  land 
knows,  that  the  period  of  youth  cannot  be  safely  passed 
without  it.  Those  thronging  passions,  those  swaying 
sympathies  of  social  life,  the  deeper  musings  of  solitary 
hours,  the  imaginations,  the  affections,  the  thoughts, 
unuttered  and  unutterable, — all  the  sweeping  currents 
that  bear  the  youthful  heart  it  scarcely  know^s  whither, 
• — all  show  that  it  cannot  be  thrown,  without  infinite 
peril,  to  drift  upon  a  sea  of  doubt. 

Humanity,  in  fine,  and  especially  in  its  growing  cul- 
tivation, is  too  hard  a  lot,  it  appears  to  me,  if  God  has 
not  opened  for  it  the  fountains  of  revelation.  Without 
that  great  disclosure  from  above,  human  nature  stands, 
in  my  contemplation  of  it,  as  an  anomaly  amidst  the 
whole  creation.  The  noblest  existence  on  earth  is  not 
provided  with  a  resource  even  so  poor  as  instinct.  On 
the  heart  that  is  made  to  bear  the  weight  of  infinite 


THE    ARGUMENT    FROM    MIRACLES.  257 

interests,  sinks  the  crushing  burthen  of  doubt  and 
despondency,  of  fear  and  sorrow,  of  pain  and  death, 
without  resource,  or  reUef,  or  comfort,  or  hope.  The 
cry  of  the  young  ravens,  the  buzzing  of  insect  Ufe  in 
every  hedge,  is  heard  ;  but  the  call  that  comes  up  from 
the  deep  and  dark  conflict  of  the  overshadowed  soul, 
dies  upon  the  vacant  air ;  and  there  is  no  ear  to  hear, 
nor  eye  to  pity.  Oh  !  were  it  so,  what  could  sustain 
the  human  heart,  sinking  under  the  burthen  of  its 
noblest  aspirations  ?  "The  still,  sad  music  of  human- 
ity," sounding  on  through  all  time,  would  lose  every 
soothing  tone,  and  would  become  a  wail,  in  which  the 
heart  of  the  world  would  die  ! 

And  why  must  any  man  think  that  the  world  is  left 
to  that  darkness  and  misery  ?  Because  he  cannot 
believe  that  a  communication  has  been  made  from 
heaven  in  the  only  conceivable  way  in  which  it  can 
be  made  and  'proved  ;  by  miracles.  For  I  affirm,  that 
if  that  great  preliminary  difficult)^  were  over,  all  diffi- 
culties would  vanish  before  the  stupendous  proofs  of  a 
revelation.  He  that  thinks,  then,  that  the  world  is  left 
to  nature's  darkness,  thinks  thus,  I  repeat,  because  he 
cannot  believe  in  miracles ;  because  he  cannot  admit 
that  the  order  of  nature,  which  is  itself  not  an  end,  but 
a  means  to  an  end,  may  be  interrupted  for  the  greatest 
of  all  ends  ;  because  he  will  not  admit,  that  the  Infinite 
Power  is  superior  to  the  laws  itself  has  made  ;  because 
he  will  not  allow,  in  his  philosophy,  that  liberty  to  the 
Infinite  Parent,  in  changing  and  adapting  his  provi- 
sions to  the  wants  of  his  children,  that  he  allows  to 
every  earthly  parent.  Is  this  the  childlike  and  trust- 
ful, the  deep-searching  and  discerning,  the  expansive 
and  unprejudiced  spirit  of  true  philosophy,  or  is  it  the 
shallow  and  skeptical  spirit  of  bondage  to  the  mere 
22* 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  MIRACLES. 

outward  forms  and  processes  of  things,  regardless  of 
their  higher  meanings  and  ends  ? 

Here  for  the  present  I  leave  the  subject.  I  have  not 
undertaken  in  this  discourse  to  prove  the  truth  of 
Christianity  ;  but,  if  I  have  succeeded  in  removing  the 
great  obstacle,  in  opening  the  door  to  the  argument ; 
the  conclusion,  I  think,  will  easily  follow.  I  have  not 
undertaken  to  prove  that  there  have  been  miracles ; 
but  I  do  hold  myself  entitled  to  say,  as  the  close  and 
inference  of  this  discourse,  that  I  should  wonder  if  there 
had  not  been  miracles.  The  philosophical  presump- 
tion is  for,  rather  than  against  them.  Nature  is  for, 
more  than  it  is  against  them ;  its  mechanical  order 
only  being  against  them,  while  its  whole  spirit  is  in 
their  favour.  Man's  necessity,  God's  mercy,  is  for 
them  ;  and  against  them  is — what  ?  What  is  against 
all  legitimate  wisdom  and  conviction  ?  Why,  only  a 
doubt, — which  is  mostly  vague  and  irresponsible, — 
which,  because  it  is  a  doubt,  holds  itself  scarcely  bound 
to  give  a  reason  ;  and  which,  though  it  is  a  doubt,  sits 
immovable,  as  if  it  held  the  very  seat  of  knowledge, 
and  throne  of  reason.  To  allow  it  to  sit  there  undis- 
turbed, is  to  yield  more  deference  to  a  shadow  than  to 
the  very  substance  of  reason  and  tiiith. 


THE    SCRIPTURE 

CONSIDERED   AS     THE     RECORD     OF    A    REVELATION. 


It  has  become  very  important,  as  it  seems  to  us, 
that  the  advocates  of  a  divine  revelation  should  care- 
fully and  accurately  define  the  ^ound  which  they 
undertake  to  defend.  In  logical  order,  this  task  is 
preliminary  to  the  defence  itself.  Our  position  is  to 
be  taken  before  it  is  to  be  maintained.  What  is  it  to 
believe  in  a  revelation  ?  Or,  in  other  words,  what  is 
the  question  between  the  believer,  and  the  unbeliever? 
This  we  shall  undertake  to  define,  in  the  first  place, 
and  then  shall  offer  some  general  remarks  on  belief 
and  unbelief. 

There  are  two  methods  by  which  mankind  may 
arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  truth.  The  one,  is  by 
observation,  by  reflection,  by  reasoning,  by  the  natural 
exercise  of  the  human  faculties.  The  other  is,  by  a 
supernatural  communication  from  Heaven  ;  and  this 
different  from,  and  superior  to,  reasoning,  observation, 
intuition,  impulse,  and  every  known  operation  of  the 
human  mind.  Now  we  contend  that  it  is  in  a  com- 
munication of  this  nature  that  our  scriptures  originated. 

But  let  us  consider  more  particularly  the  vehicle  of 
this  communication — the  Scriptures.  It  is  on  this 
point  that  believers  differ  somewhat  among  themselves. 
And  it  is  from  rash  positions  on  this  subject,  or  firom 
marking  too  negligently  and  too  broadly  the  lines  of 
defence,  that  the  advocates  of  a  revelation  expose  them- 


260  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

selves  to  the  strongest  attacks  of  infidelity.  The 
Scriptures,  then,  it  might  seem  needless  to  say,  are  not 
the  actual  communication  made  to  the  minds  that  were 
inspired  from  Above  ;  but  they  are  a  '  declaration  of 
those  things  which  were  most  surely  believed  among 
them.'*  They  are  not  the  actual  word  of  God,  but 
they  are  a  '  record  of  the  word  of  God'.t  They  are  of 
the  nature  of  a  testimony.  'We  speak  that  we  do 
know,  and  testify  that  we  have  seen.'t  This  distinc- 
tion, obvious  as  it  may  seem,  is  not  without  its  impor- 
tance; and  it  unhappily  derives  some  consequence 
from  the  earnestness  with  which  it  is  opposed.  To 
say  so  simple  a  thing  as  that  the  Bible  is  not  the 
original,  the  very  revelation  made  to  the  prophets  and 
apostles,  but  the  record  of  that  revelation,  is  an  excess 
of  temerity  thought  to  be  worthy  of  the  most  heinous 
charges. 

But  the  distinction  is  intrinsically  important.  It  is 
important  to  make  the  discrimination,  and  to  say, 
that  the  communication  of  light  and  truth  was  one 
thing,  and  the  record  of  that  communication  another. 
The  communication  was  divine  ;  the  record  was  hu- 
man. It  was,  strictly  speaking  and  every  way,  a 
human  act.  The  manner,  the  style,  the  phraseology, 
the  choice  of  words,  the  order  of  thought,  the  selec- 
tion of  figures,  comparisons,  arguments,  to  enforce  the 
communication,  was  altogether  a  human  work.  It 
was  as  purely  human,  as  peculiarly  individual  in  the 
case  of  every  witness,  as  his  accent,  attitude,  or  ges- 
ture, when  delivering  his  message.  And,  indeed,  we 
might  as  well  demand  that  Paul's  gesture  or  intona- 
tion on  Mars'  Hill,  should  be  faultless,  as  to  demand 
that  the  style  of  his  letter  to  the  Galatians  should  be 
faultless  ;  for,  in  truth,  the  action  and  the  accent  were 

•  Luke  i.  1.  t  Rev.  i.  2.  t  John  iii.  U 


THE  RECORD  OF  A  REVELATION.      261 

as  truly  a  part  of  the  communication,  as  the  words 
employed  to  set  it  forth.  We  are  about  to  argue  for 
this  general  position,  and  in  doing  so  we  shall  more 
clearly  define  and  guard  it ;  but  we  wished  to  state  it 
with  some  precision  in  the  outset.  If  there  ever  were 
productions  which  showed  the  fire  and  fervent  work- 
ings of  human  thought  and  feeling,  they  are  our 
Scriptures.  We  know  not  how  it  is  possible  for  any 
one  candidly  to  read,  or  thoroughly  to  study  them, 
without  coming  to  this  conclusion.  And  we  say, 
therefore,  that  the  question  between  the  believer  and 
the  unbeliever  is,  not  whether  the  words  of  this  com- 
munication are  grammatically  the  best  words,  not 
whether  the  illustrations  are  rhetorically  the  best  il- 
lustrations, not  v/hether  the  arguments  are  logically 
the  best  arguments  ;  but  the  question  is,  whether 
there  is  any  communication  at  all.  Let  any  man 
admit  this,  let  him  admit  it  in  any  shape,  and  though 
there  may  be  difficulties  and  disputes,  we  shall  find  no 
difficulty  in  settling  beyond  all  dispute,  some  truths 
from  the  Scriptures  ;  and  tiTiths,  too,  of  dearer  con- 
cern to  us  than  all  the  visible  interests  of  this  world. 

But  is  this  view  of  the  Bible  a  right  and  safe  one  ? 
To  this  question  let  us  now  proceed. 

1.  Let  us,  as  the  first  step,  proceed  to  inquire  of  the 
Scriptures  themselves.  We  say,  then,  that  what  has 
now  been  stated,  is  the  natural,  and  we  might  say, 
the  unavoidable  impression  which  a  reader  would 
take  fi-om  the  perusal  of  the  Scriptures.  The  vehicle 
of  revelation  is  language.  The  things  we  have  to 
deal  with  are  words.  They  are  not  divine  symbols 
of  thought ;  they  are  not  pure  essences  of  ideas  ;  they 
are  words.  The  vehicle,  we  say,  is  language.  We 
shall  soon  undertake  to  show,  that  language  is,  from 
its  very  nature,  an  imperfect  instrument  of  communi- 


262  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

cation.  But,  for  the  present,  we  only  say,  that  the 
language  of  revelation  is  the  natural  language  of  the 
period  to  which,  and  of  the  men  to  whom  we  refer  it. 
The  idioms  of  speech,  the  peculiarities  of  style,  the 
connections  and  dependences  of  thought  and  reason- 
ing, the  bursts  of  feeling,  all  seem  to  us  as  natural  in 
the  Bible  as  they  are  in  any  other  book.  We  see 
ideas,  indeed,  that  we  ascribe  to  inspiration ;  but  we 
see  no  e\ddence,  we  can  discern  no  appearance  of  any 
supernatural  influence  exerted  upon  the  style,  either 
to  make  it  perfect,  or  to  prevent  it  from  being  imper- 
fect. Let  us  compare  the  Scriptures  with  other  Avri- 
tings.  If  we  open  almost  any  book,  especially  any 
book  written  in  a  fervent  and  popular  style,  we  can 
perceive,  on  an  accurate  analysis,  that  some  things 
were  hastily  written,  some  things  negligently,  some 
things  not  in  the  exact  logical  order  of  thought ;  that 
some  things  are  beautiful  in  style,  and  others  coarse 
and  inelegant ;  that  some  things  are  clear,  and  others 
obscure  or  "  hard  to  be  understood."  And  do  we  not 
find  all  these  things  in  the  Scriptures  ?  What  is  a 
sound  and  rational  criticism  but  a  discernment  of 
just  such  things  as  these  ?  What  is  peculiarity  of 
style  but  something  proceeding  from  the  particular 
mind  of  the  writer  ;  but  something,  therefore,  par- 
taking, not  of  divine  ideas,  but  of  human  conceptions  ? 
And  who  has  more  of  this  peculiarity  of  style  than 
John,  or  Paul?  And  now  suppose  that  Paul  had 
written  a  letter  to  any  one  of  his  friends  on  religion, 
and  had  written  not  in  his  apostolical  character ;  that 
he  had  said,  as  he  sometimes  did  say,  this  is  '  not  from 
the  Lord  V  Can  any  rational  man  doubt,  whether 
that  letter  would  have  exhibited  the  same  style  as  his 
recorded  epistles? 


THE    RECORD    OF    A    REVELATION.  263 

If  such,  then,  be  the  natural  impression  arising  from 
the  perusal  of  the  Scriptures,  we  are  so  to  receive  them, 
unless  they  themselves  direct  us  otherwise.  Do  they 
direct  us  otherwise  ?  Do  they  anywhere  tell  us  that 
the  manner  of  writing,  the  style,  the  words,  came  from 
unmediate  divine  suggestion,  or  were  subject  to  mira- 
culous superintendence?  To  us  it  is  clear  that  the 
passages  usually  adduced  in  support  of  these  views 
of  inspiration,  fall  entirely  short  of  the  positions  they 
are  brought  to  establish.  'All  Scripture  is  given  by 
inspiration  of  God  ;'  and  '  holy  men  spake  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;' — these  are  the  passages. 
Now  the  question  is,  whether  these  declarations  refer 
to  the  matter  of  revelation,  or  to  the  style  ;  to  the  sub- 
stance of  the  communication,  or  to  the  form ;  to  the  thing 
testified,  given,  spoken,  or  to  the  manner  of  speaking, 
imparting,  testifying.  We  say,  to  the  matter,  the  sub- 
stance, the  thing  testified.  Others  insist,  that  reference 
is  had  to  the  style,  the  form,  the  manner,  also.  There 
is  nothing  in  the  words  to  decide  between  us,  and 
we  must  have  resort,  therefore,  to  general  consider- 
ations. We  must  go  to  the  general  aspect  and 
obvious  character  of  the  sacred  writings.  And  on  this 
subject  we  have  a  statement  to  make,  which  is  worthy 
of  special  observation.  So  strong  is  the  aspect  of  iiatii- 
ralness  upon  the  whole  face  of  the  Scriptures,  so 
marked  are  the  peculiarities  of  individual  thought, 
manner  and  style,  that  many  of  the  most  learned  and 
profound  Orthodox  scholars  have  given  up  the  doctrine 
of  immediate  suggestion,  and  retain  only  that  of  a  gen- 
eral superintendence.  But  we  surely  may  remind  them, 
that  the  Scriptures  themselves  furnish  as  little  warrant 
for  the  doctrine  of  superintendence  as  for  that  of  sug- 
gestion. If  the  passages  before  quoted  prove  anything 
with  regard  to  style,  they  prove  immediate  suggestion. 


264  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

If  they  prove  nothing  on  this  point,  then  the  Bible  does 
not  anywhere  ;  for  they  are  the  strongest  in  the  Bible. 

The  doctrine  of  superintendence,  undoubtedly,  comes 
not  from  the  Scriptures,  but  from  what  is  thought  to 
be  the  exigency  of  the  case.  It  is  introduced  to  save 
the  sacred  writings  from  the  charge  of  possible  error  ; 
a  charge  which  we  shall  by  and  by  undertake  to  show, 
does  not,  in  anything  material,  attach  to  them,  on 
what  we  think  to  be  a  more  rational  and  unincumbered 
theory.  We  see  no  need  of  supposing  the  apostles,  for 
instance,  to  have  spoken  and  written  under  any  other 
influence  than  that  of  truth  and  goodness  ;  truth  super- 
naturally  communicated  to  them,  but  not  by  them 
supernaturally  taught.  The  teaching,  in  short,  is  full 
of  nature  and  truth.  And  we  should,  with  as  much 
reason,  demand  that  Paul's  speech  should  have  been 
freed  from  that  impediment  or  infirmity,  which  made 
some  among  the  Corinthians  declare  it  to  be  "  contemp- 
tible/' as  that  his  style  should  be  freed  from  those 
obscurities,  those  imperfections,  in  other  words,  which 
made  Peter  say  that  it  is  "hard  to  be  understood."  And 
we  might  as  well  say,  that  when  his  accent  or  gesture 
was  liable  to  be  wrong,  there  was  a  divine  superinten- 
dence or  interference  to  put  it  right,  as  to  say  this  with 
regard  to  his  written  expressions,  his  figures  and 
illustrations,  his  style  and  mode  of  communication. 

2.  That  there  was  no  supernatural  perfection,  or 
accuracy^  or  infallibility,  in  the  Scriptural  style  or  mode 
of  communication,  we  think  any  one  may  be  convinc- 
ed by  considering,  in  the  next  place,  the  very  nature  of 
language. 

Human  language  is  essentially  and  unavoidably  an 
imperfect  mode  of  communication.  It  is  sufiiciently 
correct ;  but  the  idea  of  absolute  perfection  or  infallibil- 
ity, if  it  were  rightly  and  rigidly  considered,  does  not 


THE    RECORD    OF    A    REVELATION.  265 

and  cannot  belong  to  it.  We  are  not  merely  saying, 
now,  that  the  style  of  our  Christian  teachers  is  not 
perfect,  according  to  the  laws  of  rhetoric  ;  that  it  is 
not  perfect  Greek.  That  is  admitted  on  all  hands. 
But  we  say  that  it  is  not  perfect,  because  it  cannot  be 
perfect,  as  an  instrument  of  thought.  Perfection  and 
imperfection  in  this  matter  are  words  of  comparison. 
Absolutely,  they  do  not  apply  to  language.  Excellence, 
or,  if  any  one  pleases  to  call  it  so,  perfection  in  style, 
is  something  relative.  It  is  relative,  for  instance,  to 
the  age  and  country  in  which  it  is  delivered.  What 
is  perfect  for  one  people  and  period,  is  not  perfect  for 
another.  It  would  happen,  then,  that  even  if  the 
sacred  style  had  possessed  some  unintelligible  perfec- 
tion for  its  own  age,  it  would  have  lost  it  for  the  next, 
and  for  every  succeeding  age.  Is  it  not  felt  by  every 
judicious  commentator,  that  the  ancient  phraseology 
in  which  the  Scriptures  are  clothed,  throws  great  diffi- 
culties in  the  way  of  understanding  them  ?  Are  not 
these  difficulties  such,  that  the  mass  of  mankind  cannot, 
of  themselves,  understand  certain  passages,  and  must 
receive  the  explanation  of  them  on  trust  ?  To  what 
purpose  is  it,  then,  to  argue  for  the  infallibility  of  the 
sacred  style  ?  Language  is  also  relative  to  the  mind, 
the  mind  absolutely  considered.  A  perfect  or  infallible 
language  must  be  that  which  conveys  perfect  or  infal- 
lible thoughts  to  the  mind.  But  now  when  we  talk 
about  perfect  or  infallible  thoughts,  are  we  not  very 
much  beyond  our  depth  ?  Can  any  instrument  convey 
to  us  thoughts  which  are  perfect,  which  are  capable  of 
being  no  more  clear  or  true,  which  are  never  to  be 
changed  in  the  slightest  degree,  in  all  the  coming  aRd 
brightening  dispensations  of  our  being  ?  To  us,  it  seems 
as  if  there  were  great  presumption  in  the  prevailing  lan- 
guage about  truth  and  error.  As  if  any  sect  or  any  set 
23 


266  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

of  men,  called  Christians,  or  called  by  any  other  name ; 
as  if  any  human  being  held  the  absolute,  the  abstractly 
pure,  and  unchangeable  truth  !  As  if  any  creed  or 
language,  or  human  thought  could  escape  every  taint 
of  error  ;  as  if  it  could  put  off  all  limitation,  obscurity, 
peculiarity  and  everything  that  marks  it  as  belonging 
to  a  finite  and  frail  nature  !  "  To  err  is  human."  It 
is  a  part  of  our  dispensation  to  find  our  way  to  truth 
through  error.  The  perfect  is  wrought  out  from  the 
imperfect.  We  see  this  in  children  ;  and  in  this  respect, 
we  are  all  but  children. 

The  thought  came  pure  from  the  All-revealing  Mind ; 
but  when  it  entered  the  mind  of  a  prophet  or  apostle, 
it  became  a  human  conception.  It  could  be  nothing 
else,  unless  that  mind,  by  being  inspired,  became  super- 
human. The  inspired  truth  became  the  subject  of 
human  perception,  feeling,  and  imagination ;  and  when 
it  was  communicated  to  the  world,  it  was  clothed  with 
human  language  ;  and  that  perception,  feeling,  imagi- 
nation, lent  its  aid  to  this  communication,  as  truly  as 
to  any  writings  that  ever  were  penned.  It  is  this,  next 
to  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  it  is  this  naturalness, 
simplicity,  pathos,  and  earnestness  of  manner,  that  give 
them  such  life  and  power. 

The  case,  then,  stands  thus.  It  has  pleased  God  to 
adopt  human  language  as  the  instrument  of  his  com- 
munications to  men ;  an  instrument  sufficiently  correct, 
though  not  absolutely  perfect.  We  might  as  reason- 
ably demand  that  the  men  should  be  faultless,  as  that 
the  style  should  be  faultless.  Neither  were  so.  And 
as  the  faults  and  mistakes  of  the  men,  do  not  invalidate 
the  sufficiency  of  their  main  testimony,  still  less  would 
any  fauks  or  inaccuracies  of  their  style,  figures,  illus- 
trations, or  arguments,  if  proved  to  exist,  set  aside  the 
great,  interesting,  and,  among  Christians,  the  unques- 


THE    RECORD    OF    A    REVELATION. 


267 


tioned  matters  of  revelation,  which  they  have  laid 

before  us.  ,  ,  -j 

3    A  word,  now,  in  the  third  place,  on  the  unavoid- 
able or  actual  concessions,  upon  this  subject,  among 
all  intelligent  and  sober  Christians.    Let  us  see  if  they 
do  not  lead  us  to  the  same  resuU.    It  must  be  admitted 
that  the  inspired  penmen  usually  wrote  in  conformity 
with  the  philosophy  of  their  respective  ages,  in  contor- 
mity    therefore,  with  some  portions  of  natural  and 
metaphysical  philosophy  that  are  false.     The  common 
remark  on  this  subject,  is,  that  they  did  not  profess  to 
ffive  instructions  on  astronomy,  demonology,  or  meta- 
physics, but  on  rehgion.     In  briefly  passing  this  point, 
we  should  like  to  ask  those  who  so  zealously  insist  that 
the  phrase,  "All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of 
God  "  refers  to  every  word,  or  to  every  idea  m  the  Bible, 
what  they  are  to  do  with  the  Mosaic  theory  of  the  solar 
system,  and  of  the  starry  heavens?     But  to  proceed 
with  the  concessions  to  which  we  have  referred.     It 
cannot  be  denied  that  there  are  some  slight  discrepances 
in  the  evangelical  narratives.     And,  indeed,  the  com- 
mon and  the  very  just  answer  to  this  allegation  in  our 
books  of  evidences,  is,  that  these  differences,  so  far  from 
weakening  the  testimony,  strengthen  it,  by  showing 
that   there  was  no  collusion    among   the  witnesses. 
Once  more,  it  is  common  now  to  admit,  that  the  Bible 
is  to  be  interpreted  as  other  books  are.    But  we  do  not 
see  how  it  is  possible  to  enter  thoroughly  into  the  spirit 
of  this  rule,  unless  the  composition  of  the  Bible  is  looked 
upon  as  a  human  work— a  work  produced  by  the  natu- 
ral operation  of  human  thought  and  feeling.     If  there 
was  frequent  and  supernatural  interference  with  the 
writer's  natural  mode  of  expressing  himself,  such  a 
fact,  it  seems  to  us,  w^ould  seriously  disturb  the  appli- 
cation of  the  rule  laid  down,  and  would,  in  fact,  warrant 


268  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

many  of  those  superstitious  and  irrational  views  of  the 
Scriptures,  which  are  fatal  to  just  criticism  and  sound 
scholarship. 

If,  then,  it  be  admitted  that  there  are  among  our 
sacred  books,  mistakes  in  philosophy,  and  discrepances, 
how^ever  slight,  in  statements  of  facts,  and  if  the  Bible  is 
subject  to  the  ordinary  rules  of  criticism  on  language, 
the  inference  seems  unavoidable,  that  these  writings, 
so  far  as  their  composition  is  concerned,  are  to  be 
regarded  as  possessing  a  properly  and  purely  human 
character. 

4.  But  we  come  now  to  the  great  difficulty  and 
objection.  It  is  said  that  if  these  views  are  correct, 
the  Bible  is  a  fallible  book,  and  unworthy  of  reliance. 
We  maintain,  therefore,  in  the  fourth  place,  that  the 
infallibility  which  many  Christians  contend  for,  and 
upon  the  defence  of  which  unbelievers  are  willing 
enough  to  put  them,  is,  in  our  apprehension,  unneces- 
sary to  the  validity  and  sufficiency  of  the  communica- 
tion. 

What  is  a  revelation  ?  It  is  simply  the  communi- 
cation of  certain  truths  to  mankind ;  truths,  indeed, 
which  they  could  not  otherwise  have  fully  understood 
or  satisfactorily  determined  ;  but  truths  nevertheless 
as  easy  to  be  communicated  as  any  other.  Why  then 
is  there  any  more  need  of  supernatural  assistance  in 
this  case,  than  in  any  other  ?  We  are  constantly  speak- 
ing to  one  another  without  any  fear  of  being  misunder- 
stood. We  are  constantly  reading  books  without  any 
of  this  distrust ;  and  books,  too,  written  by  men  in 
every  sense  fallible,  which  the  Scripture  writers,  in 
regard  to  the  revelation  made  to  them,  are  not.  Nay, 
we  are  reading  books  of  abstruse  philosophy,  in  the  full 
confidence  that  we  understand  the  general  doctrines 
laid  down.     But  the  matters  of  revelation  are  not 


THE  RECORD  OF  A  REVELATION.      269 

abstruse.  They  are  designed  to  be  understood  by  the 
mass  of  mankind.  They  are  designed,  Uke  the  Hght, 
to  shine  upon  man's  daily  path.  What  if  a  man  should 
say  he  cannot  trust  the  light  of  the  sun,  and  will  not 
walk  by  it,  because  it  comes  through  so  earthly  and 
fallible  a  medium  as  the  atmosphere  ?  The  air,  cer- 
tainly, is  an  imperfect  medium  of  light.  There  are 
motes  and  mists  and  clouds  in  it.  Yet  we  have  not 
the  least  doubt,  that  we  see  the  sun,  and  the  path  that 
we  walk  in,  and  the  objects  around  us.  It  does  not 
destroy  the  nature  of  light  that  it  comes  to  us  through 
the  dense  and  variable  atmosphere ;  and  it  does  not 
destroy  the  nature  of  truth  that  it  comes  to  us  through 
the  medium  of  human  language. 

But  let  us  descend  to  particulars.  What  particular 
truth,  then,  that  either  does  belong  to  revelation,  or 
has  been  conceived  to  belong  to  it,  requires  an  infallible 
style,  or  a  supernatural  influence  for  its  communication  ? 
Not  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus,  and  his  living,  teaching, 
suffering,  and  dying  to  save  us  from  sin  and  misery ; 
not  the  assurance  of  God's  paternal  love  and  mercy  and 
care  for  us ;  not  the  simple  but  solemn  and  most  glorious 
doctrine  of  a  future  life ;  not  precept,  not  promise,  not 
warning,  nor  encouragement,  nor  offered  grace  and  aid. 
But  suppose  it  be  contended  that  more  belongs  to  the 
revelation  ;  "  fixed  fate,  free  will,  foreknowledge  abso- 
lute." Suppose  it  be  conceded,  that  the  matter  of  any 
or  every  creed  that  Christians  have  made,  belongs  to  it. 
Yet  their  makers,  we  presume,  will  not  maintain  that 
any  inspiration  or  supernatural  guidance  is  necessary 
to  set  forth  these  matters.  They  surely  cannot  feel 
any  particular  distrust  about  the  powers  of  language. 
They  who  have  made  creeds  on  purpose  to  remedy 
the  imperfections,  or  clear  up  the  obscurities,  or  settle 
the  uncertainties  of  the  Scriptural  communication, 
23* 


270  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

they  surely  are  not  the  persons  we  have  to  contend 
with  in  this  argument. 

"  But  ah  !"  it  is  said,  "  this  sort  of  reasoning  leads  to 
infidelity."  "  Saves  us  from  infidelity,"  the  objector 
might  more  truly  say.  Tliis,  at  least,  is  the  purpose 
of  our  reasonings  ;  and  we  believe  it  is  their  tendency. 
Unbehevers  have  derived  more  plausible  and  just  objec- 
tions from  the  prevailing  theological  assumptions  with 
regard  to  our  sacred  books,  than  from  any  other  quarter. 
The  attacks  which  are  usually  made  upon  the  philo- 
sophy of  Moses,  the  imprecations  of  David,  the  differ- 
ences among  the  apostles,  the  obscurities  of  Paul,  and 
upon  instances  of  puerility,  coarseness,  and  indelicacy 
in  style,  or  inappositeness  in  illustration,  are  all  of  this 
nature.  If  it  were  considered  that  the  successive  com- 
munications which  God  has  made  to  the  world,  have 
borne  upon  them  the  signs  and  marks  of  their  succes- 
sive ages ;  if  it  were  considered,  that  the  light,  in  its 
visitations  to  the  earth,  has  struggled  through  the 
medium  of  human  imperfection,  through  mists  of  pre- 
judice, and  clouds,  often  indeed,  gorgeous  clouds  of 
imagination ;  many  difficulties  and  objections  of  this 
sort  would  be  removed. 

"  But  how  shall  we  know  what  is  true  and  what  is 
false ;  what  belonged  to  the  age,  and  what  to  the  light  ?" 
This  difficulty  is  more  specious  than  real.  When  ap- 
plied in  detail  to  the  Scriptures,  it  will  be  found  to  amount 
to  very  little.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  for  instance, 
about  matters  of  morality  and  duty.  Indeed,  it  has 
often  been  admitted  by  our  Christian  apologists,  that 
a  revelation  was  not  so  much  needed  to  tell  us  what 
is  right,  as  to  give  sanctions  for  it.  Then,  again,  with 
regard  to  these  sanctions,  with  regard  to  the  future 
good  and  evil,  we  believe  no  one  has  ever  pretended  to 
deny  them,  or  ever  will,  on  the  ground  that  the  sacred 


THE    RECORD    OF    A    REVELATION.  271 

writers  may  have  been  mistaken.  Very  few  indeed, 
I  denv  thei«  The  great  body  of  Umversahsts  as 
ttllU  nowlelieve  in  a  f-ure  r.r^— 
And  so  as  to  all  the  absolute  doctrines  of  Sci  ptuie, 
Aere^s  no  dispute  about  the  authority  on  which  hey 
*  The  only  question  is,  whether  some  of  the  lUus- 
tS  ons  are  judicious,  belonging  as  they  do  o  the 
=  of.e.4hanegoi,,ar^^^^^^^^^ 

*:arren:ttu:h  mTttS  that  fainy  belong  to  the 
vTy  different  department  of  immediate   inspiration^ 
"WhSe   appeals  to  reason,"  it  has  been  very  justly 
wnoe^eco-vv  inspiration." 

said,  "waives,  quoad  hoc,  his  c  aim  »  . 

When  an  inspired  teacher  says  to  us.     This  docl  me 
Tuue;"  thatl  one  thing;  we  receive  the  declaiat  on 
on  his  'simple  authority.     But  when  he  says      I    an 
orove  this  to  you  by  a  series  of  arguments ,    that  is 
Se*  hing.'  When  he  says,  "  this  •; -^^-'^^ 
-the  utterance  of  that  word  arouses  our  reason      K 
is  not  implicit  faith  that  is  then  demanded,  but  an 
atteniv"    consideration   of   the   force   o     arguments. 
The  thL  argued  demands  faith;  but  the  argument 
ftom  It   very  nature,  appeals  to  reason;  and  it  is   he 
ve"y  office  of  reason  to  judge  whether  the  argumen 
lound  and  sufficient.     And  so  when  a  sacied  Miter 
say"  "This  doctrine  is  true,  and  it  is  like  such  a  thing 
or  H  may  be  so  illustrated,"  he  appeals  to  our  judgment 
and  Isfe  and  we  may,  without  in  the  least  question- 
•°.Ae  thing  asserted    inquire  into  the  fitness,  force, 
anVdeganc:  of  the  illustration,  allegory,  or  figure,  by 

n'V'i!—;-  shall  say  that  this  amounts  to  a 
rejection  of  Christianity;  if  for  any  P«'TO-,  ^^  ^^ 
unfair,  if  with  any  intention,  honest  oi-  d-^  °n;^'^ J  ^ 
shall  take  it  upon  him  to  say,  that  m  advocatmg  these 


272  THE    SCRIPTURES    CONSIDERED    AS 

views  of  inspiration  we  are  no  better  than  infidels  in 
disguise,  we  cannot  descend  from  the  ground  we  occupy, 
we  should  not  think  it  decent,  with  the  known  profes- 
sions which  we  make,  to  dispute  the  point  with  him. 
But  we  would  remind  him,  that  many  of  the  brightest 
lights  and  noblest  defenders  of  our  religion  fully  main- 
tain the  ground  we  have  taken,  to  be  Christian  ground. 
Erasmus  sa5^s,  "  It  is  not  necessary  that  we  should  refer 
everything  in  the  apostolic  writings,  immediately  to 
supernatural  aid.  Christ  suffered  his  disciples  to  err, 
even  after  the  Holy  Ghost  was  sent  down,  but  not  to 
the  endangering  of  the  faith."  Grotius  says,  "It  was 
not  necessary  that  the  matters  narrated,  should  be 
dictated  by  the  Holy  Spirit ;  it  was  enough  that  the 
writer  had  a  good  memory."  "  It  is  possible,"  says  the 
learned  Michaelis,  "  to  doubt,  and  even  to  deny  the 
inspiration  of  the  New  Testament,  [he  means  inspira- 
tion not  only  of  words,  but  of  ideas,  which  we  do  not 
deny,]  and  yet  to  be  fully  persuaded  of  the  truth  of  the 
Christian  religion."  Because,  he  argues,  the  facts  being 
true,  the  testimony  being  one  of  ordinary  validity,  the 
religion  must  be  true.  On  this  observation  of  Michaelis, 
Bishop  Marsh  says,  "  Here  our  author  makes  a  distinc- 
tion which  is  at  present  very  generall}^  received,  between 
the  divine  origin  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  and  the  divine 
origin  of  the  Avritings  in  which  that  doctrine  is  recorded." 
"  The  wisdom  contained  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul,"  says 
Dr.  Powell,  late  Master  of  St.  John's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, "  was  given  him  from  Above,  and  very  probably 
the  style  and  composition  were  his  own."  Dr.  Paley 
makes  the  same  distinction.  "  In  reading  the  apostolic 
writings,"  he  observes,  "  we  distinguish  between  their 
doctrines  and  their  arguments.  Their  doctrines  came 
to  them  by  revelation,  properly  so  called ;  yet  in  pro- 
pounding these  doctrines,  they  were  wont  to  illustrate, 


THE     RECORD     OF    A    REVELATION.  273 

support,  and  enforce  them  by  such  analogies,  argu- 
ments, and  considerations  as  their  own  thoughts 
suggested."  To  the  same  purpose,  Bishop  Burnet. 
"When,"  says  he,  "divine  writers  argue  upon  any 
point,  we  are  always  bound  to  believe  the  conclusions 
that  their  reasonings  end  in,  as  parts  of  divine  revela- 
tion ;  but  we  are  not  bound  to  be  able  to  make  out,  or 
even  to  assent  to,  all  the  premises  made  use  of  by  them 
in  their  whole  extent,  unless  it  appear  plainly  that  they 
affirm  the  premises  as  expressly  as  they  do  the  conclu- 
sions proved  by  them." 

We  have  thus  endeavoured  to  free  the  Scriptures 
from  the  burden  of  supporting  a  character,  to  which, 
as  we  beheve,  they  nowhere  lay  any  claim ;  the  char- 
acter, that  is,  of  being,  in  every  minute  particular,  per- 
fect and  infallible  compositions.  The  question,  we  now 
repeat,  the  momentous,  the  most  interesting  question 
between  the  believer  and  the  unbehever,  is,  whether 
God  has  made  special  and  supernatural  communica- 
tions of  his  wisdom  and  will  to  man,  and  whether  the 
Bible  contains  those  communications?  To  us,  it  appears 
of  great  consequence,  that  the  controversy  should  be 
disembarrassed  from  all  extraneous  difficulties,  and 
should  be  reduced  to  this  simple  point.  We  repeat  it, 
therefore,  that  when  prophet  or  apostle  presents  himself 
to  us  as  a  messenger  from  God,  we  receive  him  in  the 
simple  and  actual  character,  Avhich  has  been  marked 
out  in  this  discussion.  We  consider  him  as  saying,  "  I 
bear  to  you  a  message  from  God,  to  which  I  demand 
reverent  heed  ;  I  give  you,  from  divine  inspiration, 
assurance  of  certain  solemn  and  momentous  truths ; 
but  I  do  not  say  that  every  word  and  phrase  I  use, 
every  simile  and  allegory  and  consideration  by  which 
I  endeavour  to  explain  or  enforce  my  message,  is  divine, 
any  more  than  that  my  countenance,  speech,  and  action 


274      THE  SCRIPTURES  CONSIDERED  AS 

are  divine.  The  distinction  is  easy,  and  you  ought  not 
to  misapprehend  it.  I  speak  to  you  from  God  ;  but 
still  I  am  a  man.  I  speak  after  the  manner  of  men, 
and  for  the  peculiarities  of  my  own  manner,  mind, 
country,  and  age,  I  do  not  presume  to  make  the  Uni- 
versal and  Eternal  Wisdom  answerable."  It  is  as 
when  an  earthly  government  sends  its  ambassador  to 
a  revolted  province.  The  person  invested  with  such 
a  character  has  a  twofold  office  to  discharge.  He  has 
to  lay  down  propositions,  to  make  offers  of  forgiveness 
and  reconciliation.  These  are  from  the  government. 
He  has  to  explain  and  urge  these  propositions  and 
offers,  by  such  language,  illustrations,  and  arguments 
as  the  exigency  requires.  These  are  from  himself. 
"  It  is  thus,"  might  the  ambassador  of  God  say,  "  it  is 
thus  that  I  address  the  children  of  men.  My  message 
is  divine  :  my  manner  of  delivering  it,  is  human." 

And  albeit  it  were  a  man  that  spoke  thus  to  us,  and 
however  it  might  be  that  he  spoke  after  the  manner  of 
men,  yet  if  he  could  say  w^ith  a  voice  of  authority  and 
assurance,  "  God  is  love ;  like  as  a  father  pitieth  his 
children,  so  God  pities  you  ;  he  watches  over  you  with 
a  kind  care  ;  he  offers  )^ou  forgiveness,  and  redemption 
from  sin  ;  he  opens  to  you  the  path  of  immortal  life  ;" 
if  he  could  say  these  things,  it  would  be  a  message 
which  no  words  could  adequately  express.  We  should 
not  say  as  the  ancient  skeptics  did  of  Paul,  "  His 
bodily  presence  is  weak,  and  his  speech  contemptible," 
although  he  should  offend  our  taste,  or  our  prejudices, 
in  every  phrase  or  figure  by  which  he  communicated 
the  glorious  truth.  We  should  rather,  with  the  Gala- 
tians,  "  receive  him  as  an  angel  of  God,"  and  would 
kiss  the  hem  of  his  garment,  though  the  storms  of 
every  sea,  and  the  dust  and  stripes  of  every  city  had 
rent  and  soiled  it.     There  is  nothing  on  earth  of  privi- 


THE  RECORD  OF  A  REVELATION.       275 

lege,  distinction,  or  blessing,  to  compare  with  this  simple 
faith.  How  many  a  stricken  and  sorrowing  mind  has 
been  supported  and  soothed  by  that  holy  rehance! 
How  many  a  bleeding  heart  has  stanched  its  wounds 
in  that  healing  fountain !  How  many  a  spirit,  Avearied 
with  the  vanities,  or  worn  down  with  the  cares  of  this 
world,  has  sought  that  blessed  refuge !  Nor  is  it  trouble, 
or  sorrow,  or  sickness,  or  bereavement  only  that  has 
resorted  here,  and  could  go  nowhere  else  ;  but  the 
boundless,  the  ever-craving  soul,  that  sighs  for  an 
immortal  life  and  an  infinite  good,  how  often  has  it 
exclaimed,  "  To  whom  shall  I  go  ?  Thou  hast  the 
words  of  everlasting  life  !"  To  tell  us  that  all  which 
we  believe  is  nothing,  because  it  does  not  come  up  to 
the  demands  of  some  technical  creed,  or  for  any  other 
reason,  seems  to  us  an  absurdity  and  madness  of  asser- 
tion, at  which,  instead  of  inveighing,  we  can  only 
wonder. 


ON     THE 

NATURE  AND  EXTENT   OF  INSPIRATION.* 


The  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  Andover  Semi- 
nary will  excuse  us,  we  trust,  if  we  postpone  his 
claims,  for  a  while,  to  the  less  agreeable  task  of  deal- 
ing with  adversaries  who  are  assailing  us  with  weapons 
far  diffeient  from  those  which  he  uses.  With  this  re- 
mark to  guard  against  even  a  momentary  misappre- 
hension, we  shall  take  up  the  matter  of  our  thoughts 
ah  origine. 

One  of  the  evils  of  controversy,  is,  that  men  are 
driven  by  it  into  extremes  of  opinion.  The  sound  and 
sober  conclusions  at  which  they  arrive  in  calmer 
times,  are  made  to  give  way  to  extravagant  positions, 
injurious  to  the  minds  of  those  who  hold  them,  inju- 
rious to  the  cause  of  Christianity,  and  favourable  only 
to  the  attacks  of  its  enemies.  Inquiry  is  pursued  un- 
der many  undue  biases  indeed,  but  especially  under 
the  bias  of  a  wish  to  put  opponents  and  adversaries  in 
the  wrong.  New  tests,  not  only  of  practical  religion, 
but  of  Christianity  itself,  are  set  up,  in  order  to  ex- 
clude unwelcome  opinions  from  the  ground  of  our  com- 
mon faith,  and  the  maintenance  of  such  opinions  from 
the  credit  of  cherishing  its  virtues. 

It  is  of  some  importance,  at  such  times,  to  look  to 
the  foimdation  of  our  faith,  and  to  call  to  mind  its 

*■  Review  of  "  Lecture  on  the  Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.  By 
Leonard  Woods,  D.  D.,  Abbot  Professor  of  Christian  Theology  in 
the  Theological  Seminary,  Andover." 


NATURE    AND    EXTENT    OF    INSPIRATION.     277 

most  judicious  and  able  defenders,  to  point  to  the  old 
and  firm  landmarks  and  standards,  in  order  to  show 
that  these  periodical  freshets  of  theological  zeal,  which 
bear  away  "  the  wood  and  the  hay  and  the  stubble," 
are  not  powerful  enough  to  remove  those  landmarks 
and  standards ; — to  show  that  they  will  spend  their 
force  and  pass  away,  and  leave  all  that  is  weighty  and 
strong  in  our  religion,  just  where  it  was  before.  We 
say  it  is  of  some  importance.  It  is  not  of  such  impor- 
tance as  if  we  Avere  defending  the  very  ground  of  our 
faith  and  hope.  It  is  only  pointing  with  our  finger, 
and  showing  where  the  foundations  are.  He  who  feels 
his  house  to  be  strong  and  firm,  cannot  be  disturbed  if 
his  neighbour,  with  misplaced  zeal  or  benevolence, 
should  tell  him  that  it  is  all  decaying  and  sinking  be- 
neath him.  He  may  listen  to  him  with  an  incredulous 
smile,  and  may  good-naturedly  go  around  with  him 
from  pillar  to  pillar,  and  show  him  that  what  he  ap- 
prehends to  be  fatal  defect,  is  the  mere  rubbish  that 
surrounds  them. 

It  might  awaken  a  stronger  feeling,  if  that  neigh- 
bour shoidd  evidently  take  pleasure  in  the  alleged  un- 
soundness, if  he  should  exult  in  the  downfall  he  pre- 
dicted, and  if  he  should  pertinaciously  insist  upon  the 
point, manifestly  with  the  design  to  injure  the  property 
in  the  great  market  of  public  opinion.  But  still  the 
feeling  would  be  a  calm  one,  and  would  be  only 
strengthened  into  a  firmer  and  more  fearless  confi- 
dence. He  would  perhaps  put  his  hand  upon  the 
foundation  or  upon  the  pillar,  and  shake  it,  with  the 
most  careless  exertion  of  his  strens^th,  that  he  mio^ht 
show  it  to  be  safe. 

It  is  for  all  these  reasons,  that  we  shall  task  our- 
selves for  a  few  moments  to  examine  the  totally  un- 
authorised and  groundless  character  of   the    charge 
24 


278        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

now  pressed  against  us,  of  being,  notwithstanding  our 
Christian  profession,  ourselves  Infidels.  But  for  the 
same  reasons,  we  cannot  anticipate  that  we  shall 
awaken  in  ourselves  much  zeal  on  the  subject.  We 
cannot,  as  we  have  said  on  a  former  occasion,  fairly 
descend  into  the  arena  of  argument ;  Ave  cannot  seri- 
ously put  ourselves  in  contest  at  this  point  of  recent 
attack  ;  for,  with  our  professions,  it  would  seem  to  us 
a  moral  indecorum  so  to  do.  We  must  take  our  stand 
aloof  from  this,  and  simply  point  out  to  our  prying 
opponents,  whether  friendly  or  unfriendly,  their  mis- 
take. 

We  lay  our  hands  strongly,  then,  upon  the  founda- 
tion— the  Bible.  We  say  there  is  a  commujiication 
from,  Heaven.  There  is  light  supernaturally  commu- 
nicated, and  attested,  to  those  Heaven-commissioned 
prophets  and  apostles,  who  in  their  turn,  have  simply, 
naturally,  each  after  the  manner  of  his  own  age,  his 
own  style,  his  own  peculiar  habits  of  thought  and  feel- 
ing, imparted  it  to  us.  There  are  truths  recorded, 
beyond  the  human  reach  of  the  men  who  delivered 
them,  and  they  are  truths  dearer  to  us  than  hfe. 

Right  or  wrong  in  our  conviction,  this  is  what  we 
believe.  We  are  not  reasoning  now  with  infidels  ;  if 
we  were,  we  should  undertake  to  show  that  we  are 
right.  But  we  are  expostulating,  we  cannot  reason, 
Avith  those  who  deny  us  the  credit  of  the  faith  we 
profess ;  and  we  say  to  them,  again,  right  or  wrong, 
this  is  what  we  believe.  Our  opponents  must  pardon 
us,  if  we  seem  to  them  to  speak  loftily  in  a  case  like 
this.  We  put  it  to  them,  whether  they  could  do  less 
in  similar  circumstances.  If  the  Catholics,  or  if  we 
ourselves,  were  seriously  and  perseveringly  to  lay  the 
charge  against  them,  of  being  infidels  in  disguise,  we 
ask  them  if  they  could  consent  gravely  to  argue  upon 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        279 

it  1  We  put  the  case  to  their  own  feelings,  and  we 
say  to  them,  as  they  would  say  to  us  or  to  others,  in  a 
change  of  circumstances ;  "  With  all  our  solemn  pro- 
fessions before  them,  with  all  our  preaching  and  our 
prayers  in  the  name  of  Christ,  with  all  our  labours  to 
illustrate  the  holy  Scriptures,  with  all  our  publications, 
our  books,  our  commentaries  :  with  all  these  things 
before  them,  we  say  that  the  charge  they  bring  is  not 
decent ;  and  in  common  decency,  we  cannot  descend 
to  argue  the  point  with  them." 

The  only  decent  allegation  which  they  could  bring, 
is,  that  our  views  tend  to  produce  infidelity.  On  this 
point  we  should  be  at  issue  with  them,  and  should  be 
willing  to  reason.  We  are  at  issue  with  them,  indeed ; 
for  we  say  that  their  own  views  much  more  tend  to 
produce  infidelity.  Nay,  we  seriously  believe  that  it 
is  our  system,  with  thinking  minds,  that  will  prove  to 
be  the  only  sufficient  defence  and  barrier  against  utter 
unbelief;  and  this  is  one  great  reason  why  we  are 
anxious  for  its  prevalence.  We  are  perfectly  willing 
to  admit  at  the  same  time,  that  no  speculative  views 
are,  with  all  persons  and  in  all  circumstances,  an 
effectual  preservative.  We  admit  that  some  Unitarians 
in  foreign  countries  have  become  infidels.  But  do  not 
our  opponents  know,  that  many  Calvinists,  many  Or- 
thodox persons,  not  in  other  countries  alone,  but  in 
this  also,  have  become  infidels  ;  and  that  multitudes 
of  Catholics  abroad,  believers  in  the  Trinity  and  the 
atonement  and  many  kindred  points  of  doctrine,  have 
fallen  into  utter  disbelief  of  the  Christian  revelation  ? 
Doubtless  there  is  a  medium  somewhere,  which  is  per- 
fect truth  and  secure  faith  ;  and  we  believe, — without 
arrogance  we  hope,  since  it  is  a  matter  of  simple  sin- 
cerity and  consistency  so  to  believe — that  we  are 
nearest  to  that  medium. 


280       NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

It  seems  to  us  not  a  little  extraordinary,  and  it  il' 
lustrates  indeed  the  observation  with  which  we  com- 
menced these  remarks,  that  while  our  Orthodox  breth- 
ren are  charging  us  with  these  disguised  and  subtle 
errors,  they  do  so  completely  wrap  themselves  up,  as 
to  all  the  difficult  points  of  this  controversy  concerning 
inspiration,  in  general  implications  with  regard  to  their 
own  faith  in  the  scriptures,  and  that  they  push  those 
implications  to  an  extent  so  utterly  indefensible,  so 
utterly  unauthorised,  at  any  rate,  by  many  of  the 
highest  standards  of  their  own  churches.  And  we 
must  add  that  it  seems  to  us  a  fact  still  more  irrecon- 
cileable  with  candour  and  good  faith,  that  while,  with 
a  view  to  show  what  our  faith,  or  as  they  will  have  it, 
what  our  unbelief  is— while,  we  say,  for  this  professed 
purpose,  they  take  brief  sentence  and  disjointed  mem- 
bers of  sentences  here  and  there  from  our  writings, 
they  altogether  suppress  the  strong  and  full  declara- 
tions we  make  of  our  belief  in  a  supernatural  commu- 
nication to  the  inspired  teachers  of  our  religion ;  that 
they  never  tell  their  readers  or  hearers,  that  we  "  earn- 
estly contend  for  this  faith "  against  unbelievers,  and 
profess  to  find  in  it  the  highest  joy  and  hope  of  our 
being.  This,  we  must  remind  them,  is  an  utter  viola- 
tion of  all  the  received  courtesies  of  religious  contro- 
versy. For  a  reasoner  to  charge  upon  opponents  his 
inferences  as  their  faith,  has  long  been  branded  as  one 
of  the  most  inadmissible  practices  in  controversy.  But 
pertinaciously  to  do  this,  in  the  face  of  the  most  deli- 
berate protestations  to  the  contrary,  and  without  notic- 
ing such  protestations  ;  and  this,  too,  before  communi- 
ties that  either  have  not  the  means,  or  will  not  use  them, 
of  learning  the  truth,  is  a  conduct  for  which  we  would 
gladly  see  any  tolerable  apology.  For  if  he  who  "robs 
us  of  our  good  name,"  does  an  inexcusable  action,  what 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       281 

shall  we  say  of  him,  who,  without  affording  us  any 
remedy,  robs  us  of  the  name  we  most  honour  and 
value  ?  We  will  not  say  what ;  we  regret  the  neces- 
sity of  saying  thus  much. 

But  we  would  invite  those  from  whose  lips  the 
charge  of  infidelity  so  easily  falls,  to  forsake  the  con- 
venient covert  of  general  implication,  and  to  tell  us,  in 
good  truth,  what  they  themselves  believe  on  some  of 
the  matters  of  accusation  that  seems  to  them  so 
weighty. 

In  labouring  to  fix  upon  us  the  charge  of  infidelity, 
they  quote  from  us  as  proof,  the  statement,  that  "  the 
inspired  penmen  wrote  in  conformity  with  the  philosophy 
of  their  respective  ages — in  conformity  therefore  with 
some  portions  of  natural  and  metaphysical  philosophy, 
that  are  false."  We  ask  if  they  themselves  believe 
any  otherwise?  Do  they  believe  that  the  sacred 
writers  foresaw  the  discoveries  of  modern  science  ?  If 
they  had  this  foresight,  these  matters  would  not  have 
been  left  for  discovery. 

Again,  we  have  said,  "  It  cannot  be  denied  that  there 
are  some  slight  discrepances  in  the  evangelical  narra- 
tives ;"  and  this,  too,  has  been  quoted  as  evidence  of 
our  unbelief  But  can  it  be  denied  ?  Does  any  intel- 
ligent student  of  the  Scriptures — do  our  accusers  deny 
it  ?  We  confess  that  we  are  surprised  to  read  a  cita- 
tion like  this,  because  we  consider  it  as  a  conceded 
point,  in  some  of  our  best  and  best  authorised  books 
of  evidences,  that  there  are  such  discrepances,  and 
because  it  is  argued  by  our  Christian  apologists,  as  it 
was  by  ourselves,  that  these  discrepances  give  addi- 
tional credit  to  the  evangelical  witnesses,  by  showing 
that  there  could  have  been  "no  collusion  among  them." 

One  further  extract.  We  remarked  that  "unbelievers 
have  derived  more  plausible  and  just  objections  from 
24* 


282        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

the  prevailing  theological  assumptions  with  regard  to 
our  sacred  books,  than  from  any  other  quarter  ; "  and 
then  went  on  to  say,  that  "the  attacks  which  are 
usually  made  upon  the  philosophy  of  Moses,  the  im- 
precations of  David,  the  differences  among  the  apostles, 
the  obscurities  of  Paul,  and  upon  instances  of  puerility, 
coarseness,  and  indelicacy  in  style,  and  inappositeness 
in  illustration,  are  all  of  this  nature."  These  expres- 
sions, again,  are  quoted  as  confirmation  strong  of  our 
infidelity.  On  each  of  these  points  we  should  like  to 
put  those  who  arraign  us  to  the  question,  and  to  see 
where  they  stand.  Do  they  believe  in  the  philosophy 
of  Moses  ?  Do  they  reject  the  Copernican  system  in 
astronomy,  and  maintain  with  Moses,  who  wrote  in 
conformity  with  Jewish  astronomy,  that  the  heavens 
are  a  solid  concave,  in  which  the  sun,  planets  and 
stars,  like  splendid  balls  of  light,  perform  a  daily 
revolution  around  the  earth?  The  answer  of  the 
rational  defender  of  a  revelation  to  the  infidel  objection 
arising  from  this  quarter,  is  easy.  He  says  that  Moses 
was  not  commissioned  to  teach  philosoph)^,  but  religion. 
But  of  this  answer  our  opponents  deprive  themselves, 
since  to  question  the  philosoph)^  of  Moses  is  with  them 
a  sign  of  infidelity. 

Next,  "  the  imprecations  of  David  " — do  they  under- 
take to  defend  them  ?  Speaking  of  his  enemy,  David 
uses  the  following  tremendous  supplications  ; — "  Set 
thou  a  wicked  man  over  him,  and  let  Satan  stand  at 
his  right  hand.  When  he  shall  be  judged,  let  him 
be  condemned,  and  let  his  prayer  become  sin.  Let 
his  days  be  few,  and  let  another  take  his  office.  Let  his 
children  be  fatherless,  and  his  wife  a  widow.  Let  his 
children  be  continually  vagabonds,  and  beg.  Let 
the  extortioner  also  catch  all  that  he  hath,  and  let  the 
strangers  spoil  his  labour.     Let  there  be  none  to  ex- 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       283 

tend  mercy  unto  him ;  neither  let  there  be  any  to  favour 
his  fatherless  children.  Let  his  posterity  be  cut  ofif, 
and  in  the  generation  following  let  their  name  be  cut 
off.  Let  the  iniquity  of  his  fathers  be  remembered 
with  the  Lord,  and  let  not  the  sin  of  his  mother  be 
blotted  out."  It  is  impossible  not  to  say  with  Le  ClerCj 
these  are  the  words  of  a  man  "  full  of  excessive  choler, 
and  an  extreme  desire  to  be  revenged.  And  yet,"  says 
he,  "  some  famous  divines  have  put  in  the  title  to  this 
Psalm,  that  David,  as  a  type  of  Jesus  Christ,  being 
driven  on  by  a  singular  zeal,  prays  that  vengeance 
may  be  executed  on  his  enemies  !  But  where,"  he 
says,  "  do  they  find  that  Jesus  Christ  does  curse  his 
enemies  at  that  rate  ?"  Another  caption  reads  that 
"  David;  complaining  of  his  slanderous  enemies,  under 
the  person  of  Judas,  devoteth  them."  But  the  truth  is, 
all  these  explanations  are  perfectly  gratuitous.  They 
are  worse  than  gratuitous ;  they  sanction  a  wrong 
principle.  Can  it  be  right  to  curse  any  being,  and  so 
to  curse  him — to  curse  not  only  him  but  his  father,  his 
mother,  his  children,  and  his  whole  posterity,  for  his 
sin?  Indeed,  there  is  no  defence  to  be  made  of  this 
passage.  This  could  not  have  proceeded  from  the 
good  and  merciful  spirit  of  God.  It  was  the  imperfec- 
tion of  David,  thus  to  feel.  It  was  the  imperfection 
of  a  rude  and  barbarous  age.  It  belonged  to  a  period 
of  early  and  erring  piety  to  use  such  a  prayer.  And  it 
does  not  disannul  the  evidence  furnished  by  other 
portions  of  his  writings,  that  the  Psalmist  derived  an 
inspiration  from  heaven.  Those  lofty  conceptions  of 
the  spirituality  and  glory  of  God,  and  those  sacred  and 
transcendent  affections  which  he  entertained,  consider- 
ing the  period  in  which  he  wrote,  seem  to  us,  in  their 
intrinsic  character,  to  warrant  the  claim  to  more  than 
human  teaching.     The  book  of  Psalms,  as  a  whole, 


284        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

appears  to  us,  the  more  we  study  it  and  the  age  in 
which  it  was  composed,  to  bear  marks  of  an  elev^ation 
and  purity  that  are  supernatural.  There  is  nothing 
more  wonderful  to  us  in  its  character,  than  that  in  an 
age  when  the  universal  reliance  was  on  things  ma- 
terial, when  all  the  ideas  of  what  is  good,  and  happy, 
with  the  world  at  large,  stopped  at  this  point, — that 
the  mind  of  David  should  have  found  its  rest,  its 
portion,  its  all-sufficiency,  as  it  did,  in  God ;  that  he 
should,  in  this  noblest  respect,  have  gone  so  far  beyond 
the  prevailing  piety  of  every  subsequent  age.  But  we 
must  not  dwell  upon  this  subject.  Our  reverence  for 
the  Psalmist  is  great ;  but  we  cannot  be  blind  to  the 
imperfection  of  such  a  passage  as  that  which  we  have 
cited.  When  the  imprecations  of  David  are  next 
alluded  to,  we  hope  there  will  be  some  attempt  at  an 
explanation  of  them  into  accordance  with  the  received 
ideas  of  inspiration,  or  an  honest  confession  of  the 
hopelessness  of  the  task. 

We  insist  upon  these  instances,  more  than  we  should 
do  with  any  reference  that  is  personal  to  ourselves  or 
others.  They  present  difficulties,  in  truth,  to  the 
advocates  of  literal  and  plenary  inspiration  which  we 
could  wish  them  fairly  to  meet. 

Our  reference  to  "the  differences  among  the  apostles," 
it  is  said,  is  another  argument  to  prove  that  we  are 
infidels.  But  do  they,  we  ask  again,  deny  that  there 
were  differences  and  disputes  among  the  apostles — 
differences  and  disputes  in  regard  to  their  apostolic 
conduct  and  work  ?  Did  not  Paul  upbraid  Peter  at 
Antioch,  for  "  not  walking  uprightly  according  to  the 
truth  of  the  Gospel ; " — for  making  in  fact  a  false 
impression  in  his  apostolic  character  ?  Did  he  not 
"withstand  him  to  the  face,  because  he  was  to  be 
blamed  ?"     Did  not  Paul  and  Barnabas  dispute  at  the 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        285 

same  place,  and  Avas  not  "  the  contention  so  sharp,  that 
they  departed  asunder  one  from  the  other  ?" 

Then  as  to  "the  obscnrities  of  Paul;"  on  what  age 
of  Biblical  criticism  have  we  fallen,  when  it  is  denied, 
even  by  implication,  that  there  are  obscurities  in  Paul ; 
"things  hard  to  be  understood?"  On  what  age  of 
common  sense,  when  the  mention  of  these  obscurities 
is  set  down  as  confirmatory  evidence  to  sustain  the 
charge  of  infidelity  ?  And  further,  if  the  style  he  has 
adopted  is  obscure  and  hard  to  be  understood,  is  that 
style,  as  mere  style,  to  be  commended  as  anything 
more  than  a  human  composition  ?  Are  the  words  that 
compose  it,  either  "grammatically  or  rhetorically  the 
best  words?"  Still  further  as  to  the  Scriptural  style, 
the  allegation  that  there  are  instances  of  puerility, 
coarseness  and  indelicacy,  has  been  referred  to  as 
bearing  a  skeptical  aspect.  But  has  any  man  ever 
read  the  Old  Testament  without  finding  such  instances? 
To  us,  they  have  no  more  weight,  and  they  furnish  no 
more  difficulty,  as  affecting  the  question  of  a  divine 
communication,  than  the  costume  of  that  ancient  age. 
"We  should  as  soon  think  of  requiring  good  breeding 
or  politeness  in  the  waiters.  Such  phraseology  belongs 
to  the  period,  and  its  absence  would  take  away  one 
mark  of  truth  from  the  record.  But  what  the  advo- 
cates of  a  literal  and  suggesting  inspiration  are  to  do 
with  such  instances,  it  passes  our  comprehension  to 
devise.  We  beseech  them  to  consider  those  instances, 
— it  would  be  improper  to  quote  them,  we  dare  not  refer 
to  the  text — and  to  tell  us  whether  they  are  ready  to 
pledge  the  sense  and  delicacy  of  Christian  men  for  the 
propriety  of  such  passages  in  sacred  books  or  any  other 
books.  We  warn  them,  if  they  do  confound  the 
claims  of  revelation  with  the  defence  of  such  passages, 
if  they  dare  to  present  themselves  before  the  searching 


286        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

and  free  spirit  of  this  age  Avith  such  a  defence,  that 
they  will  have  something  to  do  with  infidelity,  besides 
conjuring  up  a  phantom  of  it  in  the  faith  of  their  fellow 
Christians. 

Lastly,  "  inappositeness  in  illustration."  We  would 
ask  any  man  learned  in  the  Scriptures,  whether  he 
does  not  believe  that  the  New  Testament  exhibits 
frequent  instances  of  Jewish  allegorizing  ;  and  whether 
these  instances  do  not  conform  to  the  principles  of  that 
mode  of  illustration  ;  and  whether  he  accounts  those 
principles  to  have  been  very  strict,  or  exact,  or  logical? 
We  will  refer  our  hasty  accusers  to  some  of  their  own 
authorities.  Dr.  Woods  says,  "It  is  no  objection  to  the 
inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  that  they  exhibit  all  the 
varieties  in  the  mode  of  writing  that  are  common  in 
other  works."  Other  works,  we  suppose  he  means,  of 
the  same  period,  and  indeed  he  instances  under  this 
observation  the  "allegory."  Were  the  allegories  of 
Jewish  "  w^orks  "  always  exactly  apposite  ?  He  main- 
tains, we  know,  that  there  is  a  relevance  ;  but  does 
this  amount  to  an  exact  appositeness  ?  Bishop  Atter- 
bury  says,  "The  language  of  the  East" — ^and  he 
applies  this  observation  to  the  Scriptures — "speaks  of 
nothing  simply,  but  in  the  boldest  and  most  lofty 
figures  and  in  the  longest  and  most  strained  allego- 
ries." Dr.  Powell,  Master  of  St.  John's  College, 
Cambridge,  says,  in  speaking  of  the  writings  of  Paul, 
"Lastly,  he  abounds  with  broken  sentences,  bold 
figures,  and  hard,  far-fetched  metaphors."  * 

We  introduce  two  or  three  criticisms  of  Dr.  Jahn, 
on  some  of  the  prophets,  which  we  presume  no  one 
will  call  in  question.  Of  Ezekiel,  Dr.  Jahn  says, 
"  His  tropes  and  images  do  not  always  exactly  corres- 
pond with  nature  ;"  of  Zachariah,  "  Many  novel  and 

*Dr.  Powell's  Sermon  on  Inspiration. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        287 

elegant  tropes  and  allegories  occur,  but  they  are  not 
always  quite  in  character  with  the  nature  of  the 
things  from  which  they  are  drawn."*  Can  any  critic 
maintain  that  there  is  in  the  Scriptures  an  invariable 
"  appositeness  of  illustration  ?"  If  there  is,  then  the 
language  is  not,  as  Dr.  Woods  admits  it  is,  "  com- 
pletely human,"  but  perfectly  divine. 

But  all  this  proves,  say  our  reviewers,  that  "  in  re- 
gard to  some  portions  of  the  Bible,  Unitarians  no 
more  believe  the  ideas  inspired,  than  they  do  the 
words."  Once  more,  we  ask,  do  they  believe  in  the 
inspiration  of  every  idea  that  is  contained  in  the 
Bible  ?  That  is  the  implication  conveyed  by  their 
words  ;  but  do  they  believe  it  ?  Do  they  believe  that 
the  Psalmist  was  inspired  to  say,  "  O  daughter  of 
Babylon,  thou  art  to  be  destroyed.  Happy  shall  he 
be,  that  rewardeth  thee,  as  thou  hast  served  us.  Hap- 
py shall  he  be  that  taketh  and  dasheth  thy  little  ones 
against  the  stones."  Or  when  Solomon  says,  "  Be 
not  thou  one  of  them  that  strike  hands,  or  of  them 
that  are  sureties  for  debts,"  do  they  believe  that  this 
injunction  was  inspired  ?  Or  when  Paul  uses  this 
opprobrious  language  to  the  officer  that  struck  him, 
"  God  shall  smite  thee,  thou  whited  wall !"  do  they  ac- 
count this  to  be  the  fruit  of  inspiration  ?  "  Where," 
says  Jerome,  speaking  of  this  angry  retort,  "  where  is 
that  patience  of  our  Saviour,  who,  as  a  lamb  led  to 
the  slaughter,  opened  not  his  mouth,  but  answered 
mildly  to  him  that  struck  him,  "  If  I  have  spoken  ill, 
convince  me  of  the  ill ;  but  if  well,  why  do  you  strike 
me?" 

Let  us  take  an  instance  of  a  different  character. 
Paul  says  to  Timothy,  "  Demas  hath  forsaken  me, 
having  loved  this  present  world,  and  is  departed  unto 

*  Jahn's  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament. 


288       NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OP  INSPIRATION. 

Thessalonica,  Crescens  to  Galatia,  Titus  unto  Dal- 
matia.  Only  Luke  is  with  me.  And  Tychicus  have 
I  sent  to  Ephesus.  The  cloak  that  I  left  at  Troas 
with  Carpus,  Avhen  thou  comest,  bring,  and  the  books, 
especially  the  parchments."  Now  can  any  sensible 
man  believe  that  these  ideas  were  inspired  ?  We  pre- 
sume not.  Well,  can  any  man  believe — for  this  is 
the  only  tolerable  supposition  for  our  opponents— that 
Paul  was  specially  directed  to  say  these  things  to 
Timothy  ?  They  may  believe  so,  but  to  us  it  seems 
a  most  unnecessary  exaction  upon  our  faith.  We  can 
believe  that  they  were  specially  directed  to  state  many 
things,  which  were  derived,  not  from  divine  sugges- 
tion, but  from  memory  ;  to  state  many  things 
that  were  important  as  matters  of  fact  and  testimony  ; 
and  that  in  this,  the  only  possible  sense,  such  things 
were  inspired.  But  to  suppose  that  Paul  was  divinely 
prompted  to  request  that  his  cloak  and  books  might 
be  brought  from  Troas,  and  especially  the  parch- 
ments, looks  to  us  more  like  an  attempt  to  cast  con- 
tempt on  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  than  seriously  to 
defend  it.  We  have  opened  at  this  moment  on  a  pas- 
sage of  Dr.  Woods's  Lectures,  where  he  comments  on 
this  text.  He  says  to  the  objector,  "  I  would  ask  him 
what  reason  he  has  to  think  that  the  direction  was 
unimportant  either  to  the  comfort  and  usefulness  of 
Paul,  or  to  the  interests  of  the  churches."  To  the 
interests  of  the  churches,  we  suppose  he  means,  inas- 
much  as  it  promoted  Paul's  comfort ;  and  we  answer, 
no  reason.  But  is  it  to  be  thought  that  every  request 
or  direction  of  Paul's  that  concerned  his  own  comfort, 
and,  through  that,  his  usefulness,  was  a  matter  of 
inspiration?  We  might  as  well  say  that  when  he 
asked  for  food  at  the  daily  board,  he  was  inspired,  as 
when  he  asked  for  clothing  on  the  approach  of  winter ; 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       289 

for  the  promise  of  divine  guidance  extended,  it  will  not 
be  denied,  to  what  the  Apostles  spoke,  as  much  as  to 
what  they  wrote.  But  to  presume  that  this  gaidance 
was  given  in  the  minutest  affairs  of  every  day  conve- 
nience and  prudence,  is  not  only  an  extension  of  the 
promise  wholly  unwarranted  by  the  terms  of  it,  as  we 
think,  but  it  is  a  stretch  of  inference  which  shows  that 
the  common  theory  of  inspiration  presses  hard. 

For  ourselves,  we  feel  no  such  pressure.     Our  minds 
are  so  much  at  ease  in  this  argument,  that  we  are 
ready   to   throw   the  little   ball   we   have  just   been 
winding  up,  to  our  neighbours,  for  their  further  amuse- 
ment.    We  cannot  help  referring  those — we  mean  not 
the  author  we  have  just  quoted — but  those  who  are  so 
fond  of  running  out  parallels  between  Unitarians  and 
Infidels,  who  have  lately  studied  so  hard  upon  "Bolin- 
broke,  Hobbes,  Tindal,  Morgan,  Dodwell  and  Gibbon," 
— referring  them,  we  say,  for  it  must  cost  a  good  deal 
of  labour  to  hunt  up  so  many  references  on  both  sides, 
to  the  new  instances  we  have  just  given  them,  to  be 
added  to  their  useful  catalogue.     We   warrant   that 
Bohnbroke,    Hobbes,    Tindal,    Morgan,    Dodwell    or 
Gibbon,    or,   perhaps,   Paine,   have  quoted  the  same 
passages  in  objecting  to  Christianity,  that  we  have 
quoted  in  objecting  to  the  Orthodox  views  of  inspira- 
tion.    What   a   notable   argument   is    it,   and   what 
notable  minds  must  it  be  expected  to  operate  upon ! 
Unitarians  believe  some  things  that  Infidels  believe, 
and  use  some  of  the  same  methods  of  reasoning  ;  there- 
fore Unitarians  are  Infidels !     But  let  us  try  a  different 
application  of  this  favourite  argument,  and  see  how  it 
will  stand.    Orthodox  persons  believe  in  a  Providence  ; 
so   do   many   Infidels,    therefore    the    Orthodox    are 
Infidels.     The  Trinitarians  have  departed  from  the 
simple  unity  of  God,  and  conceive  of  three   distinct 
25 


290        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

principles,  each  of  which  is  God  ;  so  did  Plato ;  there- 
fore Trinitarians  are  Platonists;  they  have  forsaken 
Christianity,  and,  shocking  to  relate  !  have  gone  back 
to  Heathenism.  Calvinists  decry  human  nature ;  so 
did  the  French  philosophers ;  therefore  Calvinists  are 
Infidel  philosophers.  They  are  Necessitarians  too ;  so 
were  some  of  the  ancient  philosophers  :  and  therefore, 
their  system  is  a  strange  mixture  of  ancient  and 
modern  skepticism.  The  parallel  might  proceed,  and 
thus  it  would  be.  "Nay,  but  we  make  distinctions," 
these  several  sects  would  say.  We  cannot  help  it ; 
we  do  not  see  them  ;  these  meshes  of  sophistry  are  all 
broken  and  crushed  before  the  step  of  this  "mighty 
and  grinding  dispensation"  under  which  we  are 
fighting  the  battle  for  truth.  "Well,  but  we  profess 
to  be  Christians."  Ay,  profess  ;  no  doubt  you  profess. 
That  furthers  your  purposes  for  a  while;  you  are 
"Infidels  in  disguise;"  you  are  on  the  way  to  a 
disclosure ;  and  "  the  sooner  you  come  out,"  the  better. 
"Ah,"  our  opponents  will  say,  with  a  serious  face  after 
all,  "but  can  you  shut  your  eyes  to  the  great,  historical 
fact,  that  some  of  the  German  theologians,  a  few  years 
ago,  speculated  on  some  points  as  you  do ;  and  that 
they  have  now  become  Infidels  ?  "  The  Catholic  shall 
answer  for  us.  "  Can  you,  Calvinistic  Protestants,  shut 
your  eyes  to  the  great,  historical  fact,  that,  but  fifty 
years  ago  the  German  theologians  speculated  in  all 
respects  as  you  do,  unless  that  they  speculated  less 
freely,  and  that  now,  some  of  them  are  Infidels,  and 
many  of  them  Unitarians,  and  that  almost  all  deny 
the  Scriptural  obligation  of  the  Sabbath,  the  eternity 
of  future  punishments,  and  hold  the  Old  Testament  to 
to  be  of  authority  inferior  to  that  of  the  New  ?  *     This 

♦  We  wish,  indeed,  that  those  whose  imaginations  are  so  possessed 
with  the  resemblance  which  we  bear  to  the  Liberal  Party  in  Ger- 


NATURE  AND   EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION.        '^33 

is  what  we  told  Luther  and  his  coadjutors  long  ago — 
told  them  so  at  the  time.  We  told  them,  that  they 
were  plunging  themselves,  or  their  successors,  at  any 
rate,  into  infidelity.  Nay,  Holy  Church  deems  but 
little  better  of  you  now,  than  that  you  are. Infidels !  It 
holds  you  outcasts  from  faith  and  hope;  and  it  ill 
becomes  you  to  protest  against  this  exclusion,  so  long 
as  you  are  dealing  out  the  whole  measure  of  its 
severity  against  those  who  differ  from  you."  We 
commend  the  argument  of  the  Catholic  to  those  whom 
it  may  concern,  and  return  to  our  discussion;  only 
saying,  as  we  pass,  that  the  Catholic  Doctors  have 
more  ground  than  they  think  for,  to  support  the 
sophism  by  which  they  claim  Protestant  Christians  as 
belonging  to  the  one  infallible  and  undivided  church. 
Protestant  Christians  do  indeed  exhibit  too  many  proofs 
of  belonging  to  it ;  and  this  we  say,  not  in  the  spirit 
of  sarcasm,  but  of  sober  and  sad  reflection. 

It  is  time  to  ask — since  the  term  is  so  vaguely  used 
and  for  such  purposes — What  is  Infidelity  ?  Let  the 
modern  Orthodox  luminaries  of  Germany,  Storr  and 
Flatt,  answer  for  us ;  for  they  answer  wisely  and  with 
discrimination.  "The  question,"  say  they,  "is  not, 
Shall  we  believe  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  under  the  same 
conditions  that  we  believe  the  declarations  of  any  other 

many  ;  who  have  rung  all  the  changes  of  argument,  warning,  and 
scarcasm,  upon  it,  till  we  should  think  it  could  scarcely  yield 
another  note  ;  we  wish  that  they  would  look  at  the  state  of  the 
Orthodox  Party  in  that  country.  How  easy  would  it  be  for  us,  if  we 
were  disposed  to  practise  this  lately  perfected  art  of  seizing  occa- 
sions, to  wage  this  petty  war  of  comparisons,  and  allusions,  and 
insinuations;  to  address  ourselves,  not  to  the  reflections,  but  to  the 
imagination  of  the  people  ;  how  easy  to  retort,  and  to  spread  a 
vague  horror  against  half  of  the  Orthodox  clergy  of  New  England  ! 
But  do  we  live  at  a  period  when  there  is  no  discrimination  ?  Is  the 
learning  of  Germany,  with  its  hasty,  though  monstrous  growth,  to 
deter  all  the  world  from  inquiry  ? 


292        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

teacher,  namely,  provided  our  reason  discovers  them  to 
be  true ;  but  the  question  is.  Shall  we  believe  the 
instructions  of  Jesus,  under  circumstances  in  which 
we  would  not  believe  any  other  teacher,  who  was  not 
under  the  special  influence  of  God.  It  is  useless  to 
speak  of  a  revelation^  if  we  attribute  to  Jesus  no  other 
inspiration  than  that  what  the  Naturalist  will  attribute 
to  him,  and  which  may  just  as  well  be  attributed  to  the 
Koran,  and  to  every  other  pretended  revelation  ;  nay, 
to  all  teachers  of  religion ;  that  is,  if  we  receive  only 
those  doctrines,  whose  truth  is  manifest  to  the  eye  of 
reason,  and  call  them  divine  only  because  all  truth  is 
derived  from  God,  the  author  of  our  reason."*  It  is  in 
this  vague  sense  that  some  Infidels  have  called  the 
Scriptures  divine ;  that  Bolingbroke  has  denominated 
them  "the  word  of  God,"  and  that  Rousseau  has  seemed 
to  acknowledge  so  much,  in  those  eloquent  testimonies 
of  his,  to  the  beauty  of  the  Scriptures  and  of  our  Savi- 
our's character,  which  put  the  coldness  of  many  Chris- 
tian teachers  to  shame.  But  now  let  the  question  be 
fairly  stated  ; — Does,  or  did,  any  Infidel  ever  admit  the 
divine,  supernatural,  miraculous  origin  of  that  system 
of  interpositions  and  instructions,  that  is  recorded  in 
the  Bible  ?  And  was  anything  ever  heard  of,  in  all  the 
annals  of  theological  extravagance,  more  monstrous, 
than  to  charge  men,  who  devoutly  and  gratefully  pro- 
fess to  receive  the  Bible  in  this  supernatural  character, 
with  being  Infidels  ? 

Let  not  our  brethren  in  the  Christian  faith  be  shaken 
from  their  steadfastness,  by  this  senseless  cry,  or  the 
vague  horror  which  it  is  designed  to  spread  abroad 
among  the  people.  Let  them  examine  the  glorious 
temple  of  their  faith,  too  clear  in  their  perceptions,  too 
strong  in  their  admiration,  to  be  disturbed  by  the  slight 
•  Bibl.  Theol.  S  16.  II.  3. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        293 

appendages  which  the  tastes  and  styles  of  different 
ages  have  gathered  around  it.  Let  them  study  the 
subhme  and  precious  record  of  heaven-inspired  truth, 
with  a  freedom,  with  a  faith,  with  a  feehng,  that 
standeth  not  in  the  letter,  but  in  the  spirit. 

We  cannot  think  it  a  hard  case  to  be  classed  in  our 
faith  on  this  subject,  with  such  men  as  Grotius  and 
Erasmus,  with  Paley  and  Burnet.  And  we  are  really 
curious  to  know,  we  wish  that  our  accusers  would  tell 
us,  what  they  are  to  do  with  such  men.  Erasmus  and 
Grotius,  Burnet  and  Paley  Lifidels!  It  is  indeed  a 
discovery  in  the  Christian  world. 

We  shall  now  take  up  a  few  moments  in  making 
some  further  references  of  this  nature ;  for  it  is  time, 
as  we  have  already  said,  to  refer  to  some  of  the  most 
able  defenders  of  our  faith,  and  to  inquire  whether 
their  names,  too,  are  to  fall  under  this  newly  devised 
opprobrium. 

St.  Jerome  says,  "  The  Prophet  Amos  was  skilled  in 
knowledge,  not  in  language."  And  then  in  a  com- 
ment on  the  third  chapter  he  adds,  "We  told  you  that 
he  uses  the  terms  of  his  own  profession,  and  because  a 
shepherd  knows  nothing  more  terrible  than  a  lion,  he 
compares  the  anger  of  God  to  Rons."  Did  not  Jerome, 
then,  regard  the  language  as  "purely  human?"  Did 
he  regard  it  as  "rhetorically  the  best  language?" 

The  learned  Le  Clerc,  whose  writings  occupy  a  dis- 
tinguished place  in  all  our  theological  libraries,  says, 
with  a  latitude  of  expression,  indeed,  beyond  what  we 
should  use— "Thus,  then,  according  to  my  hypothesis, 
the  authority  of  the  Scripture  continues  in  full  force. 
For  you  see,  I  maintain,  that  we  are  obliged  to  believe 
the  substance  of  the  history  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  generally,  all  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  Christ,  all  that 
was  inspired  to  the  Apostles,  and  also  whatsoever  they 
25* 


294        NATURE   AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

have  said  of  themselves,  so  far  as  it  is  conformable  to 
our  Saviour's  doctrine  and  to  right  reason.  It  is  plain 
that  nothing  farther  is  necessarily  to  be  believed  in  order 
to  salvation.  And  it  seems  also  evident  to  me,  that 
those  new  opinions  brought  into  the  Christian  religion 
since  the  death  of  the  Apostles,  which  I  have  here 
refuted,  being  altogether  imaginary  and  ungrounded, 
instead  of  bringing  any  advantage  to  the  Christian 
religion,  are  really  very  prejudicial  to  it.  An  inspira- 
tion is  attributed  to  the  Apostles,  to  which  they  never 
pretended,  and  whereof  there  is  not  the  least  mark  left 
in  their  writings.  Hereupon  it  happens,  that  very 
many  persons  who  have  strength  enough  of  under- 
standing to  deny  assent  to  a  thing  for  which  there  is 
no  good  proof  brought — though  preached  with  never 
so  much  gravity — it  happens,  I  say,  that  these  persons 
reject  all  the  Christian  religion,  because  they  do  not 
distinguish  true  Christianity  from  those  dreams  of 
fanciful  divines."* 

For  the  opinion  that  we  are  to  look  to  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Scriptures,  and  not  to  the  letter — not  to 
every  exact  mode  of  phraseology,  let  us  see  what 
countenance  we  have  from  Dr.  Lightfoot,  by  univer- 
sal consent  allowed  to  be  one  of  the  most  learned  and 
eminent  men  in  the  English  Church.  After  saying 
that  the  evangelists  and  apostles  used  the  Greek  ver- 
sions of  the  Old  Testament  in  their  quotations  from 
it,  he  speaks  of  that  version  in  the  following  terms  : — 
"  I  question  not  but  the  interpreters  (the  LXX,) 
whoever  they  were,  engaged  themselves  in  this  under- 
taking (the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,)  with 
something  of  a  partial  mind,  and  as  they  made  no 
great  conscience  of  imposing  on  the  Gentiles,  so  they 
made  it  their  religion  to  favour  their  own  side ;  and, 

*  Essay  on  Inspiration. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OP  INSPIRATION.       295" 

according  to  this  ill  temperament  and  disposition  of 
mind,  so  did  they  manage  their  version,  either  adding 
or  cmtaiUng  at  pleasure,  blindly,  lazily,  and  auda- 
ciously enough ;  sometimes  giving  a  very  foreign 
sense,  sometimes  a  contrary,  oftentimes  none  ;  and  this 
frequently  to  patronise  their  own  traditions,  or  to  avoid 
some  offence  they  think  might  be  in  the  original,  or 
for  the  credit  and  safety  of  their  own  nation.  The 
tokens  of  all  which,  it  Avould  not  be  difficult  to  in- 
stance in  very  great  numbers,  would  I  apply  myself 
to  it."*  Now  admitting  all,  or  anything  of  this  to  be 
true,  is  it  possible  to  suppose  that  the  apostles  held  the 
authority  of  the  Scriptures,  as  is  now  done,  to  depend 
on  their  verbal  accuracy?  There  is  reason,  indeed, 
with  Le  Clerc,  to  denominate  these  views  of  inspira- 
tion, '•  new  opinions  brought  into  the  church  since  the 
death  of  the  apostles." 

But  our  present  business  is  with  authorities.  Bishop 
Atterbury,  in  his  sermon  on  2  Peter  iii.  16,  writes  thus : — 
"  For  consider  we  with  ourselves,  what  manner  of  men 
the  apostles  were  in  their  birth  and  education,  what 
country  they  lived  in,  what  language  they  wrote  in  ; 
and  v.'e  shall  find  it  rather  wonderful  that  there  are  so 
few,  than  that  there  are  so  many  things  that  we  are 
at  a  loss  to  understand.  They  were  men  (all  except 
Paul)  meanly  born  and  bred,  and  uninstructed  utterly 
in  the  arts  of  speaking  and  writing.  All  the  lan- 
guage they  were  masters  of,  was  purely  what  was  ne- 
cessary to  express  themselves  upon  the  common  affairs 
of  life,  and  in  matters  of  intercourse  with  men  of  their 
own  rank  and  profession.  When  they  came,  there- 
fore, to  talk  of  the  great  doctrines  of  the  cross,  to 
preach  up  the  astonishing  truths  of  the  Gospel,  they 
brought,  to  be  sure,  their  old  idiotisms  [idioms]  and 

*  Vol.  II.,  p.  401. 


296        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

plainness  of  speech  along  with  them.  And  is  it 
strange,  then,  that  the  deep  things  of  God  should  not 
always  be  expressed  by  them  in  words  of  the  greatest 
propriety  and  clearness  ?" 

Bishop  Chandler  says,  speaking  of  Paul's  reason- 
ings on  certain  points,  "  In  all  this  he  saith  no  more  than 
that  the  subject  of  his  mystical  reasons,  as  they  relate 
to  Christ,  was  taught  them  by  the  Spirit ;  the  doctrines 
were  divine  ;  yet  the  means  and  topics,  from  whence 
they  were  sometimes  urged  and  confirmed,  were  hn- 
rnan." 

The  following  observations  from  Locke's  Essay  on 
the  Understanding  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  we  presume 
no  judicious  critic  will  gainsay,  and  we  see  not  how 
the  inference  is  to  be  rejected,  that  the  manner  and 
style  were  altogether  his  own,  and  purely  human,  and 
plainly  imperfect. 

"  To  these  causes  of  obscurity  common  to  St.  Paul 
with  most  of  the  other  penmen  of  the  several  books 
of  the  New  Testament,  we  may  add  those  that  are  pe- 
culiarly his,  and  owing  to  his  style  and  temper.  He 
was,  as  it  is  visible,  a  man  of  quick  thought,  warm 
temper,  mighty  well  versed  in  the  writings  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  full  of  the  doctrine  of  the  New :  all 
this  put  together,  suggested  matter  to  him  in  abun- 
dance on  those  subjects  that  came  in  his  way ;  so  that 
one  may  consider  him,  w^hen  he  was  writing,  as  beset 
with  a  crowd  of  thoughts,  all  striving  for  utterance. 
In  this  posture  of  mind  it  was  almost  impossible  for 
him  to  keep  that  slow  pace,  and  observe  minutely  that 
order  and  method  of  ranging  all  that  he  said,  from 
which  results  an  easy  and  obvious  perspicuity.  To 
this  plenty  and  vehemence  of  his  may  be  imputed 
many  of  those  large  parentheses,  which  a  careful 
reader  may  observe  in  his  Epistles.     Upon  this  ac- 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       297 

count,  also,  it  is  that  he  often  breaks  off,  in  the  middle 
of  an  argument,  to  let  in  some  new  thought  suggested 
by  his  own  words ;  which  having  pursued  and  ex- 
plained as  far  as  conduced  to  his  present  purpose,  he 
reassuines  again  the  thread  of  his  discourse,  and  goes 
on  with  it,  without  taking  any  notice  that  he  returns 
again  to  what  he  had  been  before  saying ;  though 
sometimes  it  be  so  far  off  that  it  may  well  have  slipt 
out  of  his  mind,  and  requires  a  very  attentive  reader 
to  observe,  and  so  bring  the  disjointed  members  toge- 
ther as  to  make  up  the  connexion,  and  see  how  the 
scattered  parts  of  the  discourse  hang  together  in  a 
coherent  well-agreeing  sense,  that  makes  it  all  of  a 
piece." 

We  should  not  proceed  with  these  quotations  mere- 
ly for  our  own  defence  ;  but  we  think  they  deserve 
attention  on  their  own  account,  upon  a  subject  so  little 
understood,  and  so  likely  to  attract  further  notice,  as 
the  character  in  which  the  Scriptures  are  to  be  receiv- 
ed as  containing  a  revelation  from  God.  We  shall 
therefore  make  one  or  two  extracts  from  Bishop  Bur- 
net and  Dr.  Paley,  in  addition  to  those  given  in  a  for- 
mer article. 

In  his  Exposition  of  the  Thirty  nine  Articles,  Bish- 
op Burnet  thus  writes :  "  And  thus  far  I  have  laid 
down  such  a  scheme  concerning  inspiration  and  in- 
spired writings,  as  will  afford,  to  such  as  apprehend  it 
aright,  a  solution  to  most  of  these  difficulties  with 
which  we  are  urged  on  the  account  of  some  passages 
in  the  sacred  writings.  The  laying  down  a  scheme 
that  asserts  an  immediate  inspiration  which  goes  to  the 
style  and  to  every  tittle,  and  that  denies  any  error  to 
have  crept  into  any  of  the  copies,  as  it  seems  on  the  one 
hand  to  raise  the  honour  of  the  Scriptures  very  high- 
ly, so  it  lies  open,  on  the  other  hand,  to  great  difficul 


298        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

ties,  which  seem  insuperable  in  that  hypothesis ; 
whereas  a  middle  way,  as  it  settles  the  divine  inspira- 
tion of  these  writings,  and  their  being  continued  down 
genuine  and  unvitiated  to  us,  as  to  all  that,  for  which 
we  can  only  suppose  that  inspiration  was  given ; 
so  it  helps  us  more  easily  out  of  all  difficulties,  by 
yielding  that  which  serves  to  answer  them,  without 
weakening  the  authority  of  the  whole."* 

We  give  an  extract  from  Dr.  Paley's  chapter  on  Er- 
roneous Opinions  imputed  to  the  Apostles,  referring 
our  readers,  who  would  learn  his  views  in  detail,  to  the 
whole  chapter.  "  We  do  not  usually  question  the 
credit  of  a  writer,  by  reason  of  any  opinion  he  may 
have  delivered  upon  subjects  unconnected  with  his 
evidence  ;  and  even  upon  subjects  connected  with  his 
account,  or  mixed  with  it  in  the  same  discourse  or 
writing,  we  naturally  separate  facts  from  opinions,  tes- 
timony from  observation,  narrative  from  argument. 

"  To  apply  this  equitable  consideration  to  the  Chris- 
tian records,  much  controversy,  and  much  objection 
has  been  raised  concerning  the  quotations  of  the  Old 
Testament  found  in  the  New  ;  some  of  which  quota- 
tions, it  is  said,  are  applied  in  a  sense,  and  to  events, 
apparently  different  from  that  which  they  bear,  and 
from  those  to  which  they  belong,  in  the  original. 
It  is  probable,  to  my  apprehension,  that  many  of  those 
quotations  were  intended  by  the  writers  of  the  New 
Testament  as  nothing  more  than  accommodations. 
Such  accommodations  of  passages  from  old  authors 
are  common  with  writers  of  all  countries  ;  but  in  none 
perhaps  were  more  to  be  expected,  than  in  the  writings 
of  the  Jews,  whose  literature  was  almost  entirely  con- 
fined to  their  Scriptures."  "  Those'  prophecies  which 
are  alleged  with  more  solemnity,  and  which  are  ac- 

*  P.  88,  2d  fol.  edition,  1700. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF   INSPIRATION.         299 

companied  with  a  precise  declaration  that  they  origin- 
ally respected  the  event  then  related,  are,  I  think,  truly 
alleged.  But  were  it  otherwise,  is  the  judgment  of  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament,  in  interpreting  passa- 
ges of  the  Old,  or  sometimes  perhaps  in  receiving  estab- 
lished interpretations,  so  connected  either  with  their 
veracity,  or  with  their  means  of  information  concerning 
what  was  passing  in  their  own  times,  as  that  a  critical 
mistake,  even  were  it  more  clearly  made  out,  should 
overthrow  their  historical  credit?  Does  it  diminish  it  ? 
Has  it  anything  to  do  with  it  ?"=^ 

It  is  well  known  that  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  has 
been  exceedingly  modified  by  the  progress  of  biblical 
criticism,  within  the  last  half  century.  To  this  pur- 
pose we  quote  Jahn,  in  reference  to  the  prevailing  state 
of  opinion  in  Germany.  "Most  of  the  Protestants 
formed  a  very  strict  idea  of  inspiration,  and  defended 
it  as  late  as  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century. 
But  after  the  publication  of  the  learned  work  of  Toell- 
ner  on  inspiration,  in  1772,  and  of  Semler's  examina- 
tion of  the  Canon,  1771-3,  many  undertook  to  inves- 
tigate the  doctrine  of  inspiration,  and  gradually  relaxed 
in  their  views  of  it,  until  at  last  they  entirely  banished 
the  doctrine,  so  that  at  present  but  few  admit  it."t 

It  would  not  be  difficult  to  prove  that  there  has  been 
a  similar,  though  not  an  equal,  nor  equally  extended, 
progress  of  opinion  in  England.  We  have  in  a  former 
article  referred  to  Dr.  Powell  and  Bishop  Marsh. 

Dr.  Durell,  Principal  of  Hertford  College,  Oxford, 
and  Prebendary  of  Canterbury,  said  long  ago,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  imprecations  sometimes  occurring  in  the 
Psalms, — "  How  far  it  may  be  proper  to  continue  the 
reading  of  these  Psalms  in  the  daily  service  of  our 

*  Evidences,  Part  iii.  chap.  ii. 

t  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  §23. 


300        NATURE   AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

church,  I  leave  to  the  consideration  of  the  legislature 
to  determine.  A  Christian  of  erudition  may  consider 
these  imprecations  only  as  the  natural  sentiments  of 
Jews,  which  the  benign  religion  he  professes,  abhors 
and  condemns.  But  what  are  the  illiterate  to  do,  who 
know  not  whence  to  draw  the  line  between  the  Law 
and  the  Gospel  ?  They  hear  both  read  one  after  the 
other,  and,  I  fear,  think  them  both  of  equal  obligation, 
and  even  take  shelter  under  scripture  to  cover  their 
curses.  Though  I  am  conscious  I  here  tread  on 
slippery  ground,  I  will  take  leave  to  hint,  that,  not- 
withstanding the  high  antiquity  that  sanctifies,  as  it 
were,  this  practice,  it  Would,  in  the  opinion  of  a  mf7nber 
of  wise  and  good  men,  be  more  for  the  credit  of  the 
Christian  church,  to  omit  a  few  of  those  Psalms,  and 
substitute  some  parts  of  the  Gospel  in  their  stead." 

Speaking  of  Paul's  manner  of  writing  in  his  Epistles, 
Bishop  Marsh  says,  "  The  erudition  there  displayed,  is 
the  erudition  of  a  learned  Jew.  The  argumentation 
there  displayed,  is  the  argumentation  of  a  Jewish  con- 
vert to  Christianity,  confuting  his  brethren  on  their 
own  ground." 

Still  more  strongly.  Dr.  Maltby,  late  preacher  at 
Lincoln's  Inn,  in  his  Sermons ; — "  Whatsoever  doctrines 
connected  with  revelation,  are  clearly  discoverable  in 
the  writings  of  St.  Paul,  we  receive  with  reverence  and 
faith,  as  the  will  of  God.  But  let  us  beware  how  we 
misunderstand  the  meaning  of  a  writer,  whose  mean- 
ing from  so  many  causes  may  be  misunderstood.  Let 
us  discriminate  when  he  is  addressing  his  adversaries 
as  a  logician,  and  when  he  unequivocally  expresses 
his  own  personal  conviction."* 

The  Quarterly  Review,  which  has  been  considered 
as  representing  the  sentiments  of  the  English  Church, 
*  Maltby's  Sermons,  Vol.  I.  p.  311. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        301 

in  an  article  on  Professor  Buckland's  '  Reliquice  Dilu- 
viancB^'  uses  the  following  language.  Addressing  the 
friends  of  religion,  it  says — "  We  would  call  to  their 
recollection,  also,  the  opinions  formerly  maintained,  as 
to  the  plenary  and  even  literal  inspiration  of  Scripture ; 
the  clamour  raised  against  the  first  collections  of  vari- 
ous readings,  in  the  copies  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
still  later  against  those  of  the  Old. 

"  Well  indeed  is  it  for  us  that  the  cause  of  revela- 
tion does  not  depend  on  questions  such  as  these ;  for 
it  is  remarkable  that  in  every  instance  the  controversy 
has  ended  in  the  gradual  surrender  of  those  very 
points,  which  were  at  one  time  represented  as  involv- 
ing the  vital  interests  of  religion."'^ 

But  we  have  wearied  ourselves,  and  our  readers  we 
fear,  with  quotations.  And  truly  what  need  of  autho- 
rities? Let  us  quote  Paul  himself.  So  personal,  so 
private  many  times,  so  peculiar  always,  so  mixing  up 
his  natural  feelings  and  interests  with  the  ministration 
of  the  Gospel,  that  one  of  the  charms  of  his  writings, 
is  the  charm  of  his  own  noble  generosity  and  artless- 
ness — how  is  it  possible  to  think  of  him,  in  many  of 
these  passages,  but  as  giving  utterance  to  feelings  en- 
tirely natural,  in  words  and  arguments  purely  human  ! 
Let  us  quote  Paul,  we  say  ;  and  we  may  take  a  pas- 
sage almost  at  random,  and  leave  it  to  the  judgment 
of  our  readers.  "  Am  I  not  an  Apostle  ?  Am  I  not 
free  ?  have  I  not  seen  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  ?  are  ye 
not  my  work  in  the  Lord  ?  If  I  be  not  an  apostle  un- 
to others,  yet  doubtless  I  am  to  you :  for  the  seal  of 
mine  apostleship  are  5^e  in  the  Lord.  Mine  answer  to 
them  that  do  examine  me  is  this  ;  Have  we  not  power 
to  eat  and  to  drink?  Have  we  not  power  to  lead 
about  a  sister,  a  wife,  as  well  as  other  apostles,  and  as 

*  Quarterly  Review,  No.  LXVII.  p.  U2. 

26 


302        NATURE   AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

the  brethren  of  the  Lord,  and  Cephas  ?  Or  I  only  and 
Barnabas,  have  we  not  power  to  forbear  working? 
Who  goeth  a  warfare  any  time  at  his  own  charges  ? 
who  planteth  a  vineyard,  and  eateth  not  of  the  fruit 
thereof?  or  who  feedeth  a  flock,  and  eateth  not  of  the 
milk  of  the  flock  ?"* 

We  shall  now  leave  the  charge  of  infidelity,  and 
shall  enter  upon  a  brief  consideration  of  the  Lectures 
which  we  have  placed  at  the  head  of  this  article.  We 
feel,  in  doing  so,  that  we  are  breathing  a  new  atmos- 
phere, that  we  are  passing  from  storm  to  sunshine, 
from  a  cloudy  region  to  clearer  light ;  and  truly  if  we 
are  to  fall  in  any  contest,  we  had  rather  be  stricken 
down  by  the  sunbeam,  than  by  a  driving  mist.  We 
see  in  these  Lectures  the  same  fine  and  cautious  dis- 
crimination, for  which  we  have  long  considered  Dr. 
Woods  as  distinguished,  and  which,  we  believe,  would 
render  him  eminent  in  any  church ;  and  though  he 
has  not  cleared  up  our  difficulties,  though  he  has  not, 
indeed,  grappled  with  the  difficulties  that  most  press 
upon  ovu-  own  minds,  yet,  if  we  are  wrong,  we  cer- 
tainly should  be  more  likely  to  be  reclaimed,  by  his 
discriminating  arguments,  than  by  violent  anathemas 
and  w^holesale  denunciations.  When  will  Christian 
controversialists  approach  but  so  distantly  to  the  kind- 
liness of  our  common  faith,  as  to  recognise  the  claims 
of  common  humanity,  and  to  pay  any  tolerable  respect 
to  the  sincerity  and  worth  of  their  opponents  ! 

We  understand  Dr.  Woods.  We  know  that  he  is 
no  temporizer.  We  hear  him  speak  of  dangers.  Pei- 
haps  we  admit  that  there  are  dangers ;  perhaps  we 
feel  it ;  perhaps  we  pray  for  light  and  safety,  and  fear 
lest  we  should  stretch  out  a  rash  hand  to  the  ark  of 
God  to  save  it  from  the  hands  of  the  Philistines.     All 

*  Cor.  ix.  1—7. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF   INSPIRATION.       303 

this  may  be ;  for  when  or  where  was  the  speculative 
or  moral  path,  of  any  human  being  free  from  dangers  ? 

Dr.  Woods  commences  with  "  remarks  on  the  proper 
mode  of  reasoning,  and  on  the  nature  and  source  of 
the  evidence,  by  which  divine  inspiration  is  to  be 
proved."  In  the  course  of  these  remarks,  he  introduces 
with  approbation  a  passage  from  Dr.  Knapp,  which, 
as  containing  some  important  discriminations,  we  will 
quote.  "  These  two  positions ;  the  contents  of  the 
sacred  books,  or  the  doctriiies  taught  in  them,  are  of 
divine  origin;  and  the  books  themselves  are  given 
by  inspiration  of  God,  are  not  the  same  but  need 
to  be  carefully  distinguished.  It  does  not  follow  from 
the  arguments  which  prove  the  doctrines  of  the  Scrip- 
tures to  be  divine,  that  the  books  themselves  were 
written  under  a  divine  impulse.  A  revealed  truth 
may  be  taught  in  any  book ;  but  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  book  itself  is  divine.  We  might  be  convinced 
of  the  truth  and  divinity  of  the  Christian  religion, 
from  the  mere  genuineness  of  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  and  the  credibihty  of  their  authors.  The 
divinity  of  the  Christian  religion  can  therefore  be  con- 
ceived, independently  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible. 
This  distinction  was  made  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Melancthon." 

On  this  passage  we  have  two  remarks  to  offer.  In 
the  first  place,  according  to  the  obvious  distinction 
here  adopted  by  Dr.  Woods,  we  could  take  refuge 
within  the  pale  of  Christianity,  even  though  we  believed 
much  less  than  we  do.  In  the  second  place,  beheving 
as  we  do,  we  have  no  difficulty  in  admitting  the  doc- 
trine of  inspiration  in  the  general  terms  here  laid 
doAvn. 

We  do  indeed  differ  from  the  author  of  the  Lectures 
when  he  goes  into  detail.     We  believe  that  the  truths 


304        NATURE   AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

of  our  religion  were  inspired,  and  that  the  teachers  of 
our  rehgion  were  divinely  directed  and  assisted  to  com- 
municate them ;  but  we  cannot  see  that  such  an 
inspiration  is,  or  need  be,  a  pledge  for  the  perfect 
accuracy  or  correctness  of  every  word  they  wrote,  or 
of  every  illustration  or  argument  by  which  they 
enforced  their  message. 

But  this  brings  us  to  the  question  ;  and  on  this 
question  Dr.  Woods  lays  down  the  following,  and  only 
safe,  rule,  and,  as  we  may  venture  hereafter  to  remind 
him,  the  only  rule.  "  The  single  argument,"  he  says, 
"  on  which  I  propose  to  rest  the  doctrine  of  inspiration, 
is  the  testimony  of  the  sacred  loriters  themselves.''^ 

With  this  rule  before  him,  and  after  clearing  the 
way  to  his  main  subject  by  several  qualifications,  to 
which  we  shall  soon  have  occasion  to  refer.  Dr.  Woods 
adduces  arguments  for  the  inspiration,  first  of  the  Old, 
and  then  of  the  New  Testament.  And  we  confess,  that, 
if  we  did  not  read  the  illustrations  of  his  arguments, 
or  if  we  were  not  aware  beforehand  that  our  views 
differed  from  his — that  if  we  took  his  arguments  just 
as  they  stand  in  their  simple  statement,  we  should  never 
suspect  that  they  were  designed  to  establish  a  position 
different  from  that  in  which  we  ourselves  stand. 

The  first  argument,  of  course,  for  the  inspiration  of 
the  Old  Testament,  is  from  the  passages — "  For  the 
prophecy  came  not  in  old  times  by  the  will  of  man, 
but  holy  men  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,"*  and  "  All  scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of 
God."t  Now,  not  to  insist  upon  learned  or  minute 
criticisms  on  these  passages,  from  which  we  certainly 
think  we  should  derive  some  advantages  in  the  argu- 
ment, let  them  be  taken  for  all  that  they  can  reason- 
ably be  supposed  to  mean,  or  that,  without  straining 

*  2  Peter  i.  21.  t  Tim.  iii.  16. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       305 

them,  they  can  mean  at  all.     "Prophecy"  and  "all 
Scripture"  refer  to  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole,  as 
a  collection  of  writings;    and  those   writings  had  a 
divine  and  supernatural  origin.     They  had  a  higher 
origin  than  the  will  of  man.     They  form  a  body  of 
divine  communications ;  they  are  the  authorised  records 
of  a  divine  rehgion.     Such  a  commentary  surely  satis- 
fies the  obvious  meaning  of  these  passages.     But  can  it 
be  inferred  that  Peter  and  Paul,  when  they  use  this 
language,  intend  to  claim  every  sentence  and  phrase 
as  of  divine  inspiration?     These  passages  are  precisely 
like  those  general  declarations  which  we  constantly 
make  about  the  general  character  of  books,  when  we 
have  no  intention  to  embrace  every  minute  particular. 
We  give  a  meaning  to  those  texts,  then,  a  very  natural 
and  a  most   important   meaning,   without   involving 
ourselves  in  what  seems  to  us  the  inextricable  difficul- 
ties of  defending  every  word  in  the  Old  Testament. 
Storr  and  Flatt  say,  in  commenting  on  the  passage  in 
Timothy,  "  It  is  certain  from  the  declarations  of  the 
apostle  Paul,  that  those   books  are  in  such  a  sense 
inspired  and  given  by  God,  that  they  are  to  be  regarded 
as  of  divine  authority ;  and  for  this  reason  they  are 
entitled  to  credence.     And  this  is  the  precise  idea  of 
divine  inspiration,  which,  in  the  days  of  Timothy,  was 
instilled   into  the   minds  of  all  the  Jews   from  their 
earliest  infancy."     What  Josephus  says  of  the  JeAvish 
faith  in  their  Scriptures,  we  are  perfectly  ready  to 
assent  to  ;  that  they  "  esteem  these  books  to  contain 
divine  doctrines,"  and  he  says  nothing  stronger  in  the 
whole  passage,*  to  Avhich  the  German  theologians,  just 
quoted,  refer. — But  even  if  it  were  admitted  that  the 
texts  in  question  mean  all  that  they  can  mean — that 
the  words,   "prophecy,"    and    "all  Scripture,"   mean 
♦  Against  Apaion,  Bk.  I.  8. 

26* 


306        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

every  truth,  every  idea,  contained  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, still  it  would  not  follow  that  those  "holy  men" 
were  indebted  for  their  style,  or  for  any  direction  of  their 
style,  to  inspiration. 

Dr.  Woods's  "  next  argument  to  prove  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament  scriptures,  is,  that  Christ 
and  his  apostles  treat  them  as  possessing  an  authority 
entirely  different  from  that  of  any  other  writings."  To 
this  we  give  entire  assent ;  and  we  yield  to  the  infer- 
ence so  far  as  we  think  it  can  fairly  go.  But  that  it 
goes  to  the  sanctioning  of  every  word  or  idea  in  those 
scriptures,  we  cannot  see  reason  to  admit.  Without 
attributing  to  them  any  such  perfection,  they  possess 
to  our  minds  just  such  an  authority  ;  that  is  to  say,  an 
"  authority  entirely  different  from  that  of  any  other 
writings,"  and  this  must  to  us,  of  course,  be  a  decisive 
consideration. 

The  arguments  which  Dr.  Woods  uses  to  prove  the 
inspiration  of  the  New  Testament,  are  the  following. 
First,  "that  Christ,  who  had  all  power  in  heaven  and 
earth,  commissioned  his  apostles  to  act  in  his  stead,  as 
teachers  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  confirmed  their 
authority  by  miracles ;"  secondly,  that "  Christ  expressly 
promised  to  give  his  apostles  the  Holy  Spirit  to  assist 
them  in  their  work ;"  and  thirdly,  "  that  there  are 
many  passages  in  the  New  Testament  to  show,  that 
the  writers  considered  themselves  to  be  under  the  infal- 
lible guidance  of  the  Spirit,  and  their  instructions  to 
be  clothed  with  divine  authority." 

Now  we  wish  not  to  seem  perverse  or  paradoxical 
to  any  one,  certainly  not  to  an  author  whose  reason- 
ing powers  we  greatly  respect ;  but  it  appears  to  us 
that  we  can  admit  all  these  propositions,  and  we  have 
no  doubt,  indeed,  of  their  truth,  without  coming  to  the 
conclusion  to  which  Dr.  Woods  would  guide  us.    We 


NATURE    AND    EXTENT    OF    INSPIRATION.     307 

believe  that  Jesus  authorised  the  apostles  to  teach  his 
religion,  that  he  promised  them  special  aid,  and  that 
they   considered    themselves   as   teaching   the   great 
truths  of  his  religion  under  a  guidance  which,  with 
reference  to  those  truths,  was  infallible  ;  that  they  con- 
sidered their  instructions  as  clothed  with  divine  au- 
thority ;  and  yet,  to  the  accomplishment  of  all  this,  to 
the  hare  making  of  the  co?Ji7nu?ilcation,  we  cannot 
perceive  it  to  be  necessary  that  there  should  have  been 
any  constant  and  miraculous  interference  with    the 
natural  operations  of  their  own  minds — any  supernat- 
ural guardianship  over  their   reasonings    about   the 
truths  they  were  to  deliver,  or  over  their  illustrations 
of  it,  over  their  comparisons,  figures,  or  their  phrases. 
He  who  maintains  that  inspiration  does  extend  to 
these  things,  should  bring  express  proof ;  should  bring 
"  the  testimony  of  the  writers  themselves."   Now  here 
it  is,  to  our  minds,  that  the  argument  of  Dr.  Woods  is 
essentially  deficient.     It  is  a  negative  argument ;  and 
a  negative  argument,  certainly,  against  the  strongest 
positive  presumption.     The  sacred  writers  say,  that 
they  were  directed  to  make  the  communication,  that 
they  were  commissioned  to  preach  the  Gospel ;  but 
here  their  testimony  ends.  They  do  not  say  that  they 
were,  or  would   be,  directed  minutely  in  every  phrase, 
figure,  and  illustration,  hoiv  to  preach  it.    On  the  con- 
trary, they  preach  in  a  manner,  to  all  appearance,  per- 
fectly natural   to  them.     They  preach  as  occasions 
arise,  and  their  writings  are  mostly  called  forth  by  exi- 
gencies of  trial  and  danger  in  the  state  of  the  churches. 
And,  therefore,  the  presumption  is  against  the  exten- 
sion of  inspiration  contended  for. 

We  are  aware,  indeed,  that  Dr.  Woods  insists,  that 
"  as  the  writers  of  Scripture  nowhere  limit  the  divine 
influence  which  they  enjoyed,  to  the  thoughts  or  con- 


308        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

ceptions  of  their  own  mindsj"  so  neither  should  we. 
But  can  this  canon  of  interpretation  be  supported? 
God's  interposition  in  aid  of  human  virtue,  is  taught 
without  any  express  Hmit.  Is  there,  therefore,  no  Hmit? 
Does  this  interposition  extend  to  the  immediate  and 
miraculous  control  or  guidance  of  all  holy  affections  ? 
So  men  are  said  to  be  inspired  to  teach  the  truth.  But 
can  it  be  fairly  argued  from  thence,  that  the  inspiring 
influence  extends,  beyond  the  truths  revealed,  to  the 
words  of  the  communication.  Besides,  if  there  were 
710  limit,  then  there  must  have  been  an  instant  sugges- 
tion or  prompting  of  every  word,  and  the  sacred  writer 
must  have  been  the  mere  amanuensis  or  secretary,  so 
to  speak,  of  the  inspiring  influence.  Does  Dr.  Woods 
believe  this  ?  We  presume  not ;  since  he  allows  that 
the  inspired  writers  "  use  their  own  style,"  and  only 
maintains  that  they  are  "under  such  direction,"  as 
"  certainly  to  be  secvu-ed  against  all  mistakes." 

The  truth  is,  undeniably,  that  the  act  of  composition, 
the  act  of  selecting  words  in  a  sentence,  is  as  neces- 
sarily free,  as  much  the  writer's  own  act,  as  the  act  of 
choosing  right  from  wrong.  The  very  business  of 
writing  or  speaking,  therefore,  implies  all  the  limita- 
tion we  contend  for.  A  man  may  write,  indeed,  from 
verbal  memory,  or  from  an  express  dictation  of  words, 
and  this  is  a  different  case ;  and  we  deny  not  that  a 
portion  of  the  Scriptures  fall  under  this  condition. 
Some  of  the  prophesies,  that  is,  some  sentences,  may 
have  been  written  from  express  dictation.  A  portion 
of  the  discourses  of  our  Saviour  were  undoubtedly 
written  from  an  exact  remembrance  of  the  words. 
And  yet  it  is  easy  to  see  that  this  recollection  often 
extends  only  to  the  sense.  The  words  vary ;  and  it  is 
a  remark  to  which  we  invite  particular  attention,  that 
they  vary  according  to  the  style  of  each  particular 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OP  INSPIRATION.        309 

writer.  John  is  repetitious  :  and  the  discourses  of 
Jesus  under  his  report,  though  everywhere  showing 
the  same  great  and  unequalled  Master,  take  some- 
thing of  the  form  of  his  pecuhar  style.  The  introduc- 
tory phrase,  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,"  has  the  adverb 
repeated  in  John — "  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you." 
The  repetition  never  occurs  in  the  other  evangelists  ; 
in  John,  it  is  constant  and  habitual.  And  in  short,  if 
any  one  would  understand  how  strong  is  the  aspect  of 
naturalness  in  all  their  writings,  and  of  peculiarity  in 
each  individual  writer,  Ave  would  ask  him  to  read  the 
writings  themselves — not  to  reason  about  what  must 
be,  or  ought  to  be,  but  to  read  the  writings  themselves. 
He  would  rise  from  this  perusal  with  an  argument 
stronger  than  we  can  express,  against  the  doctrine  of 
verbal  inspiration,  or  of  special  guidance  in  regard  to 
the  style  of  writing,  and  modes  of  illustration. 

To  us  it  is  singular  that  Dr.  Woods  admits  the 
whole  force  of  this  presumption,  and  yet  denies  the 
inference.  In  truth,  we  know  not  what  he  might 
not  admit,  and  yet,  with  the  mode  of  reasoning  he 
adopts,  maintain  his  theory.  He  might  admit,  that 
the  Bible  is  full  of  the  evidences  of  human  imperfec- 
tion, that  it  is  full  of  mistakes  in  style,  in  figures,  in 
illustration,  and  yet  maintain,  to  use  his  cautious 
phraseology,  that  the  Bible  is  "just  what  God  saw  to 
be  suited  to  the  ends  of  revelation."  Why,  the  con- 
clusion is  one  which  we  have  no  difficulty  of  admitting 
on  our  own  principles.  It  was  best  that  the  commu- 
nication should  be  left  to  be  made  just  as  it  was  made. 

But  let  us  see  what  Dr.  Woods  does  admit ;  and  Ave 
must  confess,  too,  our  honest  surprise  at  the  main  and 
leading  answer  which  he  makes  to  his  own  concessions. 
He  a.dmits,  what  it  has  been  thought  so  great  an 
offence  in  us  to  assert,  that  "  the  language  is  completely 


310        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

human."  He  admits,  that  '•  in  Avriting  the  Scriptures, 
the  sacred  penmen  evidently  made  use  of  their  own 
faculties;  that  "the  language  employed  by  the  inspired 
writers  exhibits  no  marks  of  a  divine  interference,  but 
is  perfectly  conformed  to  the  genius  and  taste  of  the 
writers,"  and  that  "  even  the  same  doctrine  is  taught, 
and  the  same  event  described,  in  a  different  manner 
by  different  writers."  And  his  constant  answer  is — 
Very  well ;  why  not  ? — Why  should  not  the  writers 
compose,  each  one,  in  his  own  style  and  manner? 
Why  should  they  not,  indeed,  we  say ;  but  is  this  the 
proper  answer  to  the  objection?  The  objection  is, 
that  the  style  is  natural,  and  therefore  is  not  super- 
natural. The  answer,  admitting  as  it  does  the  first 
quality,  should  show  how  the  style  can  possess  the 
other ;  or,  in  other  words,  how  the  same  style  could 
have  been  formed  under  influences  at  the  same  time 
natural  and  supernatural. 

Dr.  Woods  does  indeed  say,  "  Is  it  not  evident  that 
God  may  exercise  a  perfect  superintendency  over  in- 
spired writers  as  to  the  language  they  shall  use,  and 
yet  that  each  one  of  them  shall  write  in  his  own  style, 
and  in  all  respects  according  to  his  own  taste  ?"  That 
is  to  say,  is  it  not  evident,  that  the  thoughts  may  be 
perfectly  free,  and  yet  in  their  freedom,  be  perfectly 
controlled  by  an  influence  extraneous  and  foreign  to 
them  ?  To  which  we  must  answ^er  ;  No,  certainly,  it 
is  not  evident^  even  if  it  can  be  true.  If  it  is  evident, 
we  w  ish  that  the  Divinity  Professor  had  shoAvn  it.  We 
wish  tliat  he  had  taken  us  into  that  mysterious  region, 
and  disclosed  to  us  the  human  mind  acting  freely  under 
a  control  so  absolute  as  to  secure  the  ^perfect  accuracy 
of  its  operations !  No  man  better  than  Dr.  Woods 
knows  the  way  to  this  region,  if  there  is  any,  or  better 
knows  there  is  no  w^ay. 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        311 

Will  he,  then,  approach  it  by  analogies?  Every 
analogy,  we  think,  is  fatal  to  his  position.  We  quote 
a  sentence  from  him,  which  he  introduces  in  this  con- 
nexion, and  which,  we  think,  is  singularly  unfortunate 
for  his  argument.  '•  The  great  variety,"  he  says,  "  ex- 
isting among  men  as  to  their  rational  talents  and  their 
pecuhar  manner  of  thinking  and  writing,  may,  in  this 
way,  be  turned  to  account  in  the  work  of  revelation,  as 
well  as  in  the  concerns  of  common  life."  But  have 
men  any  infallible  direction  in  the  common  concerns 
of  life  ?  Or  in  the  spiritual  concerns  of  the  soul,  have 
they  any?  And  yet  in  both,  divine  aid  is  promised  to 
the  faithful,  and  promised  without  any  limit.  Till, 
therefore,  some  stronger  proof  is  brought  than  the  gen- 
eral promise  of  aid  and  guidance  in  teaching  revealed 
truths,  we  cannot  admit,  against  all  the  evidence  that 
appears  on  the  face  of  the  record,  that  this  guidance 
extended  to  the  very  form  and  phraseology  of  the  coin- 
munication.  The  nature  of  the  action  itself  furnishes 
a  limit. 

'•But,"  it  will  be  said,  "this  infallible  guidance  in 
the  mode  of  teaching,  is  necessary  to  insure  to  us  a 
sufficient  and  satisfactory  communication."  This,  we 
cannot  doubt,  as  we  have  said  in  a  former  article,  is 
the  great  difficulty.  "Give  us  a  perfect  book,"  we 
believe  would  be  the  language  of  our  opponents,  "and 
we  care  not  how  it  was  made."  But  is  it  right  to 
make  any  a  priori  demand  of  this  sort  ?  We  should 
rather  say,  "Give  us  a  glorious  and  unquestionable 
communication,  and  we  are  not  solicitous  as  to  the 
manner  of  it."  We  do  say, — "  Give  us  such  a  com- 
munication as  it  has  pleased  God  to  make,  and  we 
are  satisfied."  We  would  place  ourselves  reverently 
before  the  shrine,  not  to  call  in  question  its  form,  or 
the  materials  of  which  it  is  composed,  but  to  listen  to 


312        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

the  voice  that  proceeds  from  it.  We  would  listen  to 
the  oracle,  not  to  criticise  the  tone  in  which  it  speaks, 
but  to  gather  the  import  of  what  it  utters.  Let  us 
drink  of  the  "  waters  of  life,"  and  we  complain  not  if 
they  are  brought  to  us  in  ''  earthen  vessels." 

But  let  us  hear  the  objection.  Upon  the  supposition, 
that  "  as  far  as  language  is  concerned,  the  writers  were 
left  entirely  to  their  own  judgment  and  fidelity,"  Dr. 
Woods  says,  "  Here,"  we  might  say,  "  Paul  was  unfor- 
tunate in  the  choice  of  words  ;  and  here  his  lan^uag-e 
does  not  express  the  ideas  he  must  have  intended  to 
convey.  Here  the  style  of  John  was  inadvertent ;  and 
here  it  was  faulty ;  and  here  it  would  have  been  more 
agreeable  to  the  nature  of  the  subject,  and  would  have 
more  accurately  expressed  the  truth,  had  it  been  altered 
thus."  But  how  seldom  should  we  find  occasion  to 
say  this  !  How  seldom  do  we  find  occasion !  If  a 
communication  made  by  human  hands,  must  needs  be 
so  precarious  and  uncertain,  why  does  not  this  skep- 
ticism appear  in  our  commentaries  and  our  contro- 
versies ?  Why  does  it  not  extend  to  all  other  books  ? 
Why  are  we  not  in  constant  and  grievous  uncertainty 
about  the  meaning  of  our  familiar  authors,  because 
they  have  not  had  the  aid  of  inspiration  to  form  or 
modify  their  style  ? 

Why  also  do  we  not  find  it  difficult  to  distinguish 
between  the  point  which  they  labour  to  prove,  and  the 
illustrations  and  arguments  which  they  bring  to  bear 
upon  it?  Let  any  one  look  into  the  writings  of  Paul 
or  John,  and  satisfy  himself,  as  we  think  he  easily  may, 
that  there  is  no  difficulty  whatever  in  separating  what 
he  teaches  on  his  apostolic  authority,  and  what  he  puts 
forth  in  the  shape  of  argument  addressed  to  the  reason 
of  his  readers. 

The  truth  is,  after  all,  we  are  inclined  to  believe, 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.        313 

that  the  different  views  taken  of  this  point,  arise  from 
the  different  views  that  are  entertained  of  the  substance 
of  the  communication.  If  we  believed  that  the  New 
Testament  contained  a  fine,  extended,  philosophical, 
or  metaphysical  theory,  we  might  be  anxious  for  the 
infallibility  of  every  phrase  and  word.  But  even  then 
our  anxiety  would  be  hypercritical.  The  works  of 
Aristotle  and  Kant  need  no  such  pledge  in  order  to 
satisfy  the  student  that  he  understands  their  principles. 
How  much  less  is  this  pledge  necessary  to  satisfy  us 
as  to  a  few  great  facts,  doctrines,  and  principles, — all 
practical,  all  so  plain  that  he  "  who  runs  may  read," 
all  designed  for  the  comprehension  of  the  poor,  the 
ignorant,  and  unlearned  !  And  how  is  it  possible  for 
our  opponents,  on  their  principles,  to  rely  as  they  do, 
on  uninspired  translations  of  the  sacred  text?  How 
can  they  send  out  imperfect  translations  and  detached 
books  of  this  volume,  as  they  do  to  the  heathen  !  Nay, 
if  the  infallibility  of  every  sentence  and  word  is  so 
essential  to  the  validity  of  the  communication,  all  men 
must  be  learned,  before  they  can  be  put  in  a  proper 
condition  to  receive  it.  Neither  would  this  help  them ; 
for  the  learned  differ  as  much  as  others.  Infallible 
sentences  avail  nothing  without  infallible  interpreters ; 
and  these  we  cannot  have.  And  while  the  learned 
thus  differ,  as  they  always  have  and  always  will,  what 
reliance  can  there  be  for  the  body  of  Christians,  but  on 
the  substance  of  the  communication  ;  what  reliance,  in 
fact,  that  is  satisfactory,  but  upon  those  views  of  inspi- 
ration which  we  maintain  ? 

On  this  subject  of  the  sacred  style,  we  must  beg  our 
readers  to  have  patience  with  us  a  moment  longer.  We 
have  said  in  a  former  article,  that  human  language  is, 
from  its  nature,  essentially  fallible  ;  and  it  does  appear 
to  us,  that  if  this  point  were  fully  considered,  it  would 
27 


314.       NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

settle  the  whole  question  about  infallibility  in  the  loords 
of  this  communication.  All  human  language,  when 
referring  to  what  is  intellectual,  to  what  is  spiritual,  is 
but  an  approximation  to  the  truth.  Words  are  con- 
ventional signs  of  thought.  They  are  not  pictures,  and 
if  they  were,  they  could  be  pictures  only  of  external 
objects.  They  are  symbols,  and  they  bear  no  relation 
to  our  intellectual  conceptions,  but  what  they  bear  by 
common  agreement.  Now  this  point  we  press.  Was 
this  agreement  ever,  in  any  age  or  country,  perfect  and 
invariable  ?  Were  there  ever  two  persons,  to  whom 
words  expressive  of  spiritual  qualities — to  whom  the 
same  words,  though  purporting  the  same  things  in 
substance,  did  not  bear  different  degrees  and  shades 
of  meaning  ?  How  then  can  the  idea  of  absolute  in- 
fallibility be  attached  to  such  an  instrument  of  com- 
munication ? 

Suppose,  for  example,  that  a  revelation  were  now 
made  to  us  in  the  English  language.  It  is  perfectly 
evident,  on  the  one  hand,  that  so  far  as  the  matters  of 
that  revelation  were  simple  and  practical,  it  would 
convey  to  us  all,  substantially  the  same  general  ideas. 
Such  our  Scriptures  do  convey  to  all  who  read  them, 
even  though  they  come  through  the  medium  of  a 
translation ;  for  it  is  to  be  kept  in  mind,  that  we  have 
only  a  human  translation,  and  all  this  question  about 
verbal  inspiration  neither  avails  nor  concerns  anybody 
but  the  learned  ;  a  fact  of  itself  sufficient  to  show  that 
the  validity  and  authority  of  a  revelation  designed  for 
all  nations,  cannot  depend  on  verbal  inspiration.  But 
to  return  ; — we  say,  on  the  one  hand,  that  from  an 
inspired  communication  in  our  own  language,  all  would 
receive  the  same  general  ideas.  The  substance  of  the 
communication,  if  it  were  an  intelligible  one,  could  not 
escape  them,  on  a  diligent  reading :  and  this  would  be 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       315 

sufficient  for  their  moral  instruction  and  improvement. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  equally  evident  that  the 
moment  they  went  into  the  minutiae  of  meaning,  the 
moment  especially  that  they  went  into  matters  of 
speculation,  there  would  be  shades  of  difference  in  their 
conceptions.  For  what  would  they  have  to  do  in  this 
more  particular,  definite  investigation  ?  They  would 
have  to  become  critics.  They  must  resort  to  their 
dictionaries.  And  what  would  they  find  there  ?  Some 
words  with  ten,  some  twenty,  some  forty  meanings. 
What  principle  could  they  possibly  adopt,  that  would 
lead  them  to  an  unerring  and  uniform  selection?  What 
principle  would  enable  them  to  determine  the  precise 
shade  of  thought  which  one  word  receives  from  its 
connexion  with  another  ?  There  is  none  ;  there  never 
has  been  any  to  the  most  honest  and  faithful  inter- 
preters who  read  the  Scriptures  in  their  original  lan- 
guages ;  and  all  this  solicitude  about  the  perfect  verbal 
accuracy,  the  verbal  authority  of  the  Bible,  in  our 
apprehension,  is  as  useless  as  it  is  unphilosophical. 

Let  no  one  say,  "  The  question  is  not  about  words. 
Indeed  it  is  about  words.  It  is  about  the  vehicle  of 
communication,  about  style,  about  the  manner  of 
writing.  The  mode  of  communication  is  the  point  in 
debate ;  and  this  includes  phraseology,  figures,  meta- 
phors, illustrations,  allegories,  arguments.  The  ques- 
tion is, — Did  the  inspired  teachers  take  the  body  of 
divine  truth  communicated  to  them,  and  then  faithfully 
indeed,  but  naturally,  humanly,  in  the  free  and 
unforced  exercise  of  their  own  faculties,  deliver  that 
sacred  truth — or,  were  they  so  controlled  or  con- 
strained, or  supernaturally  guarded,  in  this  work,  that 
every  sentence  they  delivered  is  intrinsically,  philo- 
sophically, divinely  accurate  and  infallible  ? 

And  it  is  a  most  important  question.     To  us,  at 


316        NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

least,  with  our  views,  it  is  one  of  inexpressible  interest. 
For  it  is  with  such  an  interest  that  we  cherish  our 
belief  in  the  Scriptures  as  containing  a  divine  revela- 
tion. It  is  with  the  deepest  solicitude,  therefore,  that 
we  have  long  pondered  this  question.  The  conviction 
has  been  forced  on  our  minds  that  we  could  not,  in  any 
fairness  or  impartiality,  ascribe  to  the  Scriptures,  that 
kind  of  verbal,  illustrative,  or  logical  perfection,  which 
by  many  is  claimed  for  them,  and  we  have  felt 
unspeakable  relief  in  the  conclusion,  that  it  is  not  at  all 
necessary  to  their  character  as  authorized  records  of  a 
communication  from  Heaven.  If  others  entertain  a 
different  opinion,  we  complain  not — nay,  we  rejoice  for 
them,  in  this,  that  they  stand  "upon  the  foundation," 
though  fencing  themselves  around  with  barriers  that 
seem  to  us  to  be  needless.  And  we  hope  that  they 
will  not  be  very  much  displeased  that  we,  too,  feel  the 
"rock  of  our  salvation"  to  be  strong  and  secure 
beneath  us. 

Tliere  may  be  skeptics,  cold  or  contemptuous 
enough  to  look  with  indifference  or  with  scorn  upon 
this  transcendent,  this  all-inspiring  interest  which  we 
feel  in  the  spiritual  objects,  and  hopes,  and  destinies 
of  our  existence.  They  may  think  "this  intellectual 
being"  too  poor  a  thing  to  be  the  subject  of  such  v/ide 
contemplation,  and  of  such  intense  and  overpowering 
concern.  Yet,  what  avails  the  feeble  hand  that  would 
repress  and  bind  down  the  very  laws  of  our  nature  ? 
Still  the  thought,  the  feeling,  the  desire  invincible  and 
immortal  springs  within  us,  and  craves  its  proper,  satis- 
fying, soul-suflicing  good.  No  created  might  on  earth 
is  like  the  energy  of  that  inward  and  undying  want ; 
no  earthly  blessing  is  like  that  which  supphes  it ;  and 
no  sigh  of  human  despondency  could  be  so  mournful 
as  that  with  which  we  should  sink  from  the  holy  light 


NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.       317 

that  cheers  us.  We  stand  amidst  erring  creatures, 
ourselves  clothed  with  imperfection  and  conscious  of 
sin,  and  the  vision  of  perfect  truth  and  perfect  beauty 
and  saving  goodness  in  the  person  of  Jesus,  is  "  a  light 
come  into  the  world"  that  would  otherwise  be  dark  to 
us.  We  stand  amidst  shadows  and  mysteries,  amidst 
trials  and  sufferings ;  and  the  revelation  of  a  gracious 
and  pitying  Father  in  Heaven  is  strength,  assurance, 
consolation,  which  nothing  else  can  give.  We  stand 
upon  "this  shore  of  time" — the  beloved,  the  cherished, 
the  hallowed  in  our  sorrows,  have  gone  from  us ;  and 
the  Gospel  that  bringeth  immortality  to  light,  that 
places  them  in  immortal  regions,  and  invites  us  thither, 
is  a  message  sufficient  to  bear  us  in  rapture  through 
the  very  shadows  of  death.  Tell  us  that  "  God  hath 
spoken"  all  this  to  us;  and  we  cannot  question  the 
manner,  we  cannot  be  solicitous  about  the  words  ;  we 
can  only  "rejoice  with  joy  unspeakable  and  full  of 
glory." 

27* 


ON  FAITH,  AND  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved :  but  he  that 
believeth  not,  shall  be  condemned. — Mark  xvi.  16. 

I  HAVE  translated  the  last  word  in  the  text  "  con- 
demned "  in  conformity  with  the  best  English  versions 
and  all  the  foreign  ones,  and  with  the  undoubted  sense 
of  the  original ;  but  the  change  does  not  materially 
alter  the  meaning  of  the  passage.  I  think  it  best  to 
relieve  the  text  from  a  word,  which,  from  its  association 
with  the  language  of  the  profane,  shocks  us :  but  still 
this  passage  teaches  us  undoubtedly,  that  with  faith 
are  connected  God's  favour,  and  our  safety  and  happi- 
ness ;  and  with  unbelief,  condemnation,  rejection  of 
heaven,  and  the  soul's  perdition.  What  now  is  to  be 
understood  by  this  faith  and  this  unbelief?  And  what 
is  meant  when  it  is  said  that  the  one  justifies,  and  the 
other  condemns  us  ? 

I  have  no  doubt  that  many  persons  have  been  sur- 
prised at  the  importance  given  to  these  acts  or  states 
of  mind,  in  the  New  Testament.  And  certainly  it  can 
be  accounted  for  only  on  one  supposition.  And  that 
is,  that  belief  and  unbelief  in  Scripture  use,  embrace 
in  their  meaning,  essential  right  and  wrong,  virtue 
and  vice,  religion  and  irreligion.  The  surprise  felt  at 
their  prominence  as  the  very  grounds  of  salvation  and 
perdition,  must  have  arisen  from  the  idea  that  they  are 
mere  intellectual  or  involuntary  or  mystical  states  of 
mind.  But  this  is  not  true.  The  Scriptures  do  not 
mean  by  them,  any  mystery,  nor  any  mere  mental 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  319 

assent  and  dissent.  They  involve  moral  qualities. 
True  faith  is  a  believing  with  the  heart,  a  principle 
that  works  by  love.  Faith  is  a  feeling.  It  is  a  vital 
sense  of  things  divine.  It  is  a  state  of  the  heart  in 
accordance  with  the  thing  believed.  In  fact,  love  is 
the  very  root  of  it,  as  it  is  of  every  virtue.  Faith  is  but 
the  form  which  the  principle  of  love  takes.  And 
unbelief  is  the  reverse  of  all  this.  It  is  hatred ;  it  is 
hatred  of  truth  and  holiness.  "  Because  I  tell  you  the 
truthj''  says  our  Saviour,  "  ye  believe  me  not."  "  There- 
fore they  could  not  believe,"  it  is  said  again.  Why  ? 
Because,  among  other  reasons,  "their  hearts  were 
liardened." 

But  it  is  really  unnecessary  to  go  into  a  detailed 
examination  of  texts  on  this  point,  because  there  is  one 
general  argument  that  establishes  it  beyond  all  con- 
tradiction. The  Bible  everywhere  demands  repentance, 
sanctification,  inward  purity,  as  the  means  of  favour 
with  God  and  true  happiness.  The  Bible  is  a  book 
of  conditions  throughout ;  and  it  amazes  us  to  hear  it 
said  and  preached,  that  salvation  is  without  conditions ; 
the  mere  gift  of  God's  mercy,  without  the  doing  of  any 
thing  on  our  part.  But  the  condition  of  conditions,  is 
a  right  heart.  Does  faith  mean  some  other  thing  ? 
Then  the  demand  of  it,  contradicts  every  thing  else  in 
the  Bible.     It  cannot  be. 

But  if  the  thing  required  be  essential,  inward,  spir- 
itual virtue,  why  is  it  called  faith?  If  love  be  the 
radical  principle  required,  why  is  not  love  the  thing 
specified  ?  Why  is  it  not  written^  "  he  that  loveth  shall 
be  saved,  and  he  that  loveth  not,  shall  be  rejected?" 

I  answer,  that  virtually  it  is  written ;  actually  often, 
virtually  always.  But  it  is  doubtless  true,  that  the 
prominent  form  given  to  saving  virtue  in  the  New 
Testament  is  faith.     In  the  New  Testament  I  say ; 


320  ON    FAITH,    AND 

for  it  is  not  so  in  the  Old.  There  we  hear  much  of 
being  upright,  beneficent,  meek,  humble,  devout,  as 
conditions  of  acceptance  with  heaven.  But  the  New 
Testament  puts  all  this  most  frequently,  in  the  form  of 
faith.     Why  .^     1  repeat,  and  I  answer, 

First,  because  now  a  new  dispensation  was  ushered 
into  the  world,  and  a  new  Teacher  presented  his 
claims  ;  and  the  natural  inquiry  was,  do  you  believe  ? 
The  very  form  of  the  act  of  reception,  was  belief. 

Secondly,  belief,  and  belief  avowed  by  baptism  in 
that  age  of  persecution,  was  the  most  unequivocal 
evidence  of  virtue,  of  piety,  of  inward  and  heartfelt 
devotion  to  the  religion. 

Thirdly,  the  Gospel  was  a  more  spiritual  dispen- 
sation than  that  which  preceded  it ;  it  insisted  more 
upon  an  unseen  and  future  life ;  and  the  appropriate 
act  of  the  soul  by  which  that  future  was  laid  hold  of 
and  made  real,  was  faith.  The  thing  could  not  be  a 
matter  of  knowledge,  but  only  of  faith. 

These  reasons  are  so  obvious  that  I  need  not  dwell 
upon  them.  They  account,  I  say,  for  Christians  being 
described  as  men  oi  faith.  What  radically  distin- 
guished them,  was  their  following  of  Christ,  their  like- 
ness to  Christ ;  but  what  naturally  denominated  them, 
in  an  age  of  denial,  skepticism  and  persecution,  was  the 
reception  of  the  new  religion,  the  adherence  to  it ; 
"  these,"  men  would  say,  "  are  the  believers  in  this 
new  doctrine." 

4.  But  there  is  another  and  more  cogent  reason, 
growing  out  of  the  time,  which  gave  to  faith  its  promi- 
nence. It  was  an  age  of  reliance  on  ceremonial  ob- 
servances. Alike  among  the  Pagans  and  the  Jews, 
the  great  body  of  religious  devotees  trusted  to  an  exact 
ritual  fidelity  for  acceptance  with  God.  The  sacrifices 
duly   offered,    the   times   and   the   seasons   all   duly 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  321 

observed,  and  every  rite  fulfilled ;  the  votary  thought 
himself  entitled  to  acceptance  with  heaven.  Against 
all  such  shallow  and  superficial  claims,  therefore,  which 
might  leave  the  heart  completely  unregenerate  and 
unholy — against  all  such  Pharisaical  and  proud  pre- 
tensions, the  apostles  declared,  with  great  emphasis  and 
reiteration,  that  the  means  of  acceptance  with  God  was 
spiritual  and  not  formal,  and  especially  was  a  penitent 
and  humble  reliance  on  God's  mercy  through  Jesus 
Christ ;  upon  his  mercy,  i.  e.  as  set  forth  in  the  teach- 
ings and  sealed  in  the  blood  of  Christ.  It  was, 
I  say,  the  demand  of  an  inward  and  spiritual  virtue  in 
opposition  to  an  outward  and  useless  formality.  Jus- 
tification by  faith  therefore ;  i.  e.,  the  being  treated  as 
if  just,  or  m  other  words,  the  being  pardoned  and 
received  to  heaven  through  faith,  was  the  great  doc- 
trine of  Paul  w4ien  contending  against  a  world  of 
Pagan  and  Jewish  formalists.  "  Knowing,"  he  says, 
"  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by  the  works  of  the  law, 
i.  e.  of  the  ceremonial  law,  but  by  the  faith  of  Jesus 
Christ,  even  we  have  believed  in  Jesus  Christ,  that  we 
might  be  justified  by  the  faith  of  Christ,  and  not  by  the 
works  of  the  law  ;  for  by  the  works  of  the  law,  shall 
no  flesh  be  justified."  This  passage  is  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians.  If  you  would  obtain  satisfaction  on 
this  point,  I  would  request  you  to  read  at  your  leisure, 
the  whole  Epistle.  You  will  see,  I  think,  that  the 
apostle  is  pleading  the  argument  of  faith  against  the 
Jew's  reliance  upon  his  ritual.  The  argument  arose 
upon  the  conduct  of  Peter  ;  upon  his  timid  adherence 
to  Jewish  rites.  Paul  pursues  this  point ;  he  keeps  him- 
self to  it,  in  the  main,  I  am  certain ;  and  I  think, 
entirely.  The  question  is  continually  about  circum- 
cision and  the  bondage  to  "  the  weak  and  beggarly 
elements    of    the   world."      "Ye   observe   days   and 


ON    FAITH,    AND 

months,"  he  says,  "  and  times  and  years.  I  am  afraid 
of  you,  lest  I  have  bestowed  labom-  on  you  in  vain." 
It  is  true  that  he  often  speaks  generally  of  the  law,  and 
it  may  be  said  that  he  means  the  whole  law  of  Moses, 
both  moral  and  ceremonial.  I  have  no  objection  to 
this  view,  except  that  it  makes  the  Apostle's  reasonmg" 
less  pertinent  and  cogent. 

5.  I  have  no  objection  to  it,  because  faith  is  undoubt- 
edly set  forth,  in  the  last  place,  as  opposed  to  a  sense  of 
merit  founded  on  a  keeping  of  the  moral  law.  This 
is  the  great  subject  of  the  first  eight  chapters  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans.  It  is  the  method  of  justifica- 
tion or  of  acceptance  with  God.  And  this,  the  Apostle 
declares,  is  a  matter  not  of  merit  but  of  mercy.  He 
drawls  a  dark  picture  of  the  wickedness  of  the  w^hole 
world,  both  Jewish  and  Gentile,  in  all  ages,  and  comes 
to  this  conclusion  :  "  Therefore  by  the  deeds  of  the  law, 
there  shall  no  flesh  be  justified."  "  Therefore  we  con- 
clude," he  says  again,  "  that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith 
without  the  deeds  of  the  law."  Man  cannot  stand  before 
God,  demanding  heaven,  for  his  keeping  of  the  moral 
law ;  but  he  must  stand  there  asking  heaven,  as  the 
gift  of  God's  mercy  through  Jesus  Christ.  His  only 
hope  and  comfort  must  come  through  believing  in  that 
mercy.  Faith  is  not  opposed  to  purity  of  heart  at  all ; 
it  is  purity  of  heart ;  it  springs  from  a  right  mind  ;  it 
works  by  love ;  but  it  is  opposed  to  a  proud  claim  of 
God's  favour  and  of  heaven,  set  up  on  the  ground  of 
complete  obedience. 

The  last  two  reasons,  I  may  observe,  were  those 
which  gave  to  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  its 
significance  and  prominence  at  the  time  of  the  Refor- 
mation. The  Papal  Church  had  fallen  into  a  perilous 
reliance  upon  rites,  penances  and  personal  merits. 
Luther   felt,  with  bitter  pain,  that  these  could   not 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  323 

insure  to  him  the  favour  of  heaven  ;*  and  he  was  led  to 
cast  himself  simply  upon  the  mercy  of  God  in  Christ. 
Here  he  found  relief;  and  justification  by  faith  there- 
fore, became  his  great  doctrine.  But  educated  amidst 
mysteries  and  miracles,  he  was  led  to  conceive  that 
this  faith  had  some  mysterious  power  of  appropriating 
the  merits  of  Christ ;  and  urged  on  by  the  enthusiasm 
of  this  new  discovery,  and  the  eagerness  of  dispute,  he 
pushed  his  idea  of  faith  to  the  point  of  derogating 
from  good  works ;  an  error  which  has  not  yet  spent 
itself 

An  error,  I  say  ;  for  faith  embraces  in  itself  the  very 
essence  of  all  good  works,  all  good  affections.  Faith 
is  not  some  mysterious  and  technical  condition  of 
salvation.  It  is  simply  a  Christian  grace.  It  is  essen- 
tially a  right  heart.  It  is  the  old,  the  everlasting,  the 
universal  condition  of  happiness  and  of  God's  favour 
here  and  hereafter — a  right  heart.  And  this  is  pre- 
vailingly represented  in  the  New  Testament  as  putting 
itself  forth  in  the  act,  the  form  of  faith  ;  first,  I  repeat, 
because  a  new  dispensation  now  appeared,  and  the 
reception  of  it  of  course  was  faith ;  secondly,  because 
this  religion  was  persecuted,  and  the  most  decisive  test 
of  love  to  it,  was  faith  avowed — avowed,  i.  e.  in  baptism, 
for  that  was  the  specific  proselyte's  ordinance  ;  thirdly, 
because  this  religion  unfolded  a  future  life,  and  the 
appropriate  act  for  receiving  that  doctrine,  was  faith ; 
fourthly,  because  the  world  was  full  of  misguided 
devotees,  relying  on  forms  and  rites,  and  the  antagonist 
principle  was  faith,  a  reliance  on  God's  mercy  ;  fifthly, 
because  the  proud  assumption  of  a  goodness  sufficient 
to  claim  heaven  of  right,  is  ever  to  be  resisted :  and 

*  Nor  was  this  the  feeling  of  Luther  alone  ;  but  it  prevailed  to  a 
considerable  extent  in  the  Catholic  Church.  See  Ranke's  History 
of  the  Popes  :  Book  II. 


324 

that  which  stands  in  contradiction  to  it,  is  faith ;  a 
penitent  seeking  for  pardon  and  a  reliance  on  that 
infinite  compassion,  of  which  Ciirist  is  the  great  reve- 
lation and  pledge,  the  minister  and  the  mercy-seat,  the 
priest  and  the  altar. 

The  essence,  then,  and  the  efficacy  of  faith,  lie  m 
the  goodness,  the  love  which  is  in  it.  This,  I  know, 
is  denied.  There  is  nothing  which  Calvin  and  his 
school  more  vehemently  repudiate,  than  the  idea  that 
there  is  any  worth  or  worthiness  in  faith,  affording  a 
reason  for  its  being  accepted  of  God,  as  the  condition 
of  his  favour.  It  is  maintained,  on  the  contrary,  that 
faith  is  a  mere  arbitrary  condition.  But  what  right 
has  any  one  to  say  this  ?  Where,  in  the  Scriptures,  is 
it  said  that  faith,  as  a  passport  to  heaven,  is  regarded 
without  any  reference  to  the  virtue  that  is  in  it? 
Nowhere.  Where,  then,  is  it  implied  J  Here  is  the 
point,  I  conceive,  at  which  mistake  has  arisen.  It  is 
thought  to  be  implied  in  those  passages,  which  oppose 
faith  to  works.  The  mistake  has  arisen  from  failing 
to  observe,  that  it  is  the  claimed  merit  in  those  works 
which  is  opposed,  and  not  the  real  virtue.  "  Do  we 
then  make  void,  the  law  through  faith  ?"  says  Paul. 
"God  forbid.  Yea,  we  estabhsh  the  law."  "The 
righteousness  of  the  laAV  is  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk 
not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  spirit." 

Justification  by  faith,  then,  is  no  unreasonable  doc- 
trine nor  confounding  mystery.  It  may  be  all  made 
very  plain  by  a  simple  comparison.  You  have  given 
certain  commands  to  your  child,  let  us  suppose,  and 
you  have  promised  certain  rewards  to  obedience.  The 
child  has  disobeyed.  How,  then,  can  he  obtain  the 
forfeited  rewards?  Evidently,  if  at  all,  it  must  be 
through  your  free  grace  and  not  through  his  merit. 
But  what  condition  will  you  naturally  and  necessarily 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  325 

appoint  for  his  recovery  of  the  lost  blessings  ?  He  must 
repent,  you  will  say ;  he  must  penitently  believe  in, 
i.  e..  receive  the  offered  mercy.  Without  his  believing 
in  this  mercy,  and  thus  rejecting  all  just  right  to  it,  it 
is  morally  impossible  that  he  should  receive  it. 

Let  us  now  add  another  consideration  to  make  the 
comparison  complete.  The  child,  let  us  suppose,  is 
obstinate  and  refuses  to  repent  and  believe.  At  this 
juncture,  one  of  his  brothers  interposes  and  attempts 
the  work  of  his  recovery.  With  many  labours  and 
sacrifices,  which  wear  upon  his  health,  and  at  length 
bring  him  to  the  grave,  he  pleads  and  strives  with  the 
guilty  one  to  return  ;  or  while  engaged  in  the  work,  he 
innocently  comes  into  collision  with  the  laws  of  the 
country,  and  he  dies  a  sacrifice  for  his  brother.  With 
all  this,  let  us  suppose,  that  the  heart  of  the  erring 
child  is  touched.  He  repents.  With  faith  in  the 
offered  mercy,  he  comes  and  humbly  asks  that  it  may 
be  bestoAved  upon  him.  What  now  is  the  character  of 
this  faith  ?  It  has  taken,  you  perceive,  a  new  element. 
It  is  faith  in  his  brother's  sacrifice.  It  is  faith  in  his 
father's  mercy,  through  that  martyred  brother.  And 
this  faith,  it  is  evident,  proceeds  out  of  a  changed  heart. 
It  is  the  very  form  which,  in  the  circumstances,  a 
changed  heart  naturally  takes. 

This,  I  believe,  is  the  simple  ground  of  that,  which 
is  often  construed  in  so  strange  a  manner, — Gospel 
acceptance.  The  representation  of  it  by  Christ  and 
his  Apostles,  v/e  should  consider,  grew  out  of  circum- 
stances and  states  of  mind  existing  at  that  time.  Thus, 
when  our  Saviour  appeared,  he  came  as  Messiah. 
Would  the  Jews  receive  him  as  such  ?  This  was  the 
great  question  to  them.  This  was  the  special  burthen 
of  the  time,  that  was  pressed  upon  the  Jewish  con- 
science. Therefore,  our  Saviour  says,  "  This  is  the 
28 


326  ON    FAITH,    AND 

work  of  God,  that  ye  believe  on  him  whom  he  hath 
sent.  That  is,  reverence  for  God,  the  love  of  God, 
would  certainly  manifest  itself  in  this  way.  Thus 
again,  Paul  had  to  contend  with  self-justifying  votaries, 
who  claimed  heaven  on  the  ground  of  their  ceremonies 
or  merits.  He  takes  them  on  their  favourite  ground, 
justification.  He  takes  up  their  very  Avord.  He  shows 
them  that  they  cannot  be  justified  in  the  way  they 
propose.  And,  still  using  their  word,  though  in  strict- 
ness it  cannot  be  applied  to  any  human  creature,  he 
tells  them  that  the  only  justification  possible,  is  of 
another  kind  ;  a  gratuitous  one,  being  treated  as  if 
just ;  and  this,  through  faith  in  God's  mercy.  The 
word,  I  say,  as  a  representation  of  acceptance  with  God, 
is  extremely  figurative.  Justification  for  us,  sinners  ! 
Justification  before  God  !  The  word  almost  shocks  us. 
liiterally  it  can  have  no  application  to  us  whatever. 
Only  figuratively,  and  indeed  as  a  violent  figure,  can 
it  be  tolerated  for  a  moment.  And  the  Apostle  never 
would  have  adopted  such  a  word,  if  circumstances  had 
not  pressed  it  upon  him.  But  this  figure  adopted,  Paul 
is  naturally  led  to  surround  it  with  many  figurative 
illustrations  drawn  from  the  relations  of  debtor  and 
creditor,  principal  and  surety,  slave  and  freeman  ;  and 
upon  these  figures  has  been  built  up  a  vast  system  of 
theology,  of  which,  constructed  no  doubt  Avith  honest 
intent,  I  do  not  wish  to  say  any  thing  more  harsh,  than 
that  it  seems  to  me  an  unsightly  incumbrance  upon 
the  fair  foundations  of  Christianity.  The  simple  truth 
at  the  bottom  of  all,  is  this  :  the  good  man,  continuing 
such,  is  happy,  and  blessed,  and  shall  be  forever — not 
as  a  matter  of  merit,  but  through  the  mercy  of  God, 
revealed  in  Jesus  Christ:  the  bad  man,  while  such,  is 
miserable  and  ruined,  and  that  without  remedy. 
I  have  thus  attempted  to  make  it  appear  that  faith, 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  327 

being  but  the  Christian  form  of  essential  goodness,  is 
the  reasonable  condition  of  happiness  and  God's  fa- 
vour, and  that  the  want  of  faith,  reasonably  draws  upon 
it  the  forfeiture  of  all  this.  Let  me  now  occupy  the  re- 
mainder of  this  discourse  with  some  distinct  illustration 
of  the  natural  place  which  faith  holds  in  the  system 
of  religious  efforts  and  influences,  for  I  conceive  that 
there  is  a  significance  in  the  scripture  demand  for  faith, 
beyond  what  is  ordinarily  seen  ;  not  only  a  pertinence 
in  the  word,  in  the  form,  but  a  significance  in  the 
thing. 

Let  me  explain  this  view,  before  I  proceed  to  make 
it  the  ground  of  some  more  practical  consideration. 
Of  all  true  excellence,  then,  love  is  the  root,  the  pri- 
mal form,  the  comprehensive  character.  God  is  love^ 
not  faith.  Faith  is  an  attribute  of  imperfect  natures. 
But  now,  in  such  natures,  what  j)lace  does  faith  hold  'I 
I  answer,  that  of  the  most  immediate  motive  power. 
I  cannot  act,  as  an  intellectual  and  moral  being,  with- 
out faith ;  i.  e.  without  conviction.  I  cannot  obey 
God  unless  I  believe  in  him.  I  cannot  follow  Christ, 
unless  I  believe  in  him.  I  cannot  yield  to  the  influ- 
ence of  any  truth,  unless  I  believe  in  it.  I  cannot  care 
for  the  soul,  my  own  or  another's,  unless  I  believe  in 
the  soul.  I  cannot  resist  temptation,  unless  I  believe 
in  virtue  and  purity.  I  cannot  live  in  hope  of  immor- 
tality, unless  I  believe  in  a  future  life.  The  immediate 
motive  power  then  is  faith. 

Faith,  if  I  may  say  so,  stands  between  love  and 
works.  To  draw  a  comparison  fiom  the  mill  that 
grinds  corn ;  love  is  the  stream,  faith  is  the  water- 
wheel,  good  works  are  the  product.  Thus  faith  works 
by  love,  and  purifies  the  soul — purifies  the  life.  And  the 
result  is  certain ;  it  is  involved  in  the  principle  that 
produces  it.     Thus  when  St.  Paul  says  that  men  are 


328  ON    FAITH,    AND 

saved  by  faith,  and  St.  James,  that  they  are  saved  by 
works,  both  mean  the  same  thing  :  the  one  speaks  of 
the  necessary  impulse,  the  other  of  the  inevitable  act 
that  follows. 

From  all  this  then  it  appears  that  the  immediate, 
manifest,  practical  obstacle  to  our  salvation,  appears  in 
the  form  of  unbelief  Let  us  consider  for  a  few 
moments  in  this  serious  light,  this  great  evil  of 
unbelief 

The  divine  goodness  has  provided  a  vast  array  of 
means  for  our  recovery  from  sin,  and  growth  in  virtue 
and  piety.  Why  are  they  attended  with  so  little  effect  ? 
What  is  it  that  thwarts  heaven's  great  design  ?  It  is 
unbelief 

Let  us  enter  into  this  matter  a  little.  Religion  is 
not  a  subject  that  we  pass  by  altogether.  We  suffer 
it  to  speak  to  us.  We  assemble  ourselves  to  listen. 
It  is  a  solemn  occasion.  If  it  is  a  light  or  formal  thing 
to  any  one  here,  I  must  tell  him  that  it  is  not  so  to 
me.  This  weekly  assembling  together,  is  to  me  a 
momentous  fact  in  life.  Religion,  invested  with  the 
grandeur  of  heaven,  speaks  to  us ;  and  how  ?  As  a 
reasonable  claim,  as  a  sovereign  authority,  as  a  mo- 
mentous interest,  as  an  all-sufficing  good.  The 
preacher  discourses  upon  all  these  things.  He  speaks 
of  the  blessedness  and  glory  of  a  sacred  virtue.  He 
holds  up  a  grand  and  sublime  spirituality,  a  divine, 
inward  sufficiency  as  reigning  over  all  other  distinc- 
tions, all  other  advantages,  all  other  joys.  He  teaches 
every  man  that  he  may  walk  in  the  divinest  purity 
and  gladness,  and  in  the  noblest  independence,  not 
only  of  other  men,  but  of  his  own  base  passions.  He 
shows  him,  that  the  walk  of  daily  life,  strewed  with 
virtues,  may  be  brighter  than  the  starry  pathways  of 
Jieaven.     Oh  !  what  a  blessed  thing  were  it,  if  when 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH. 

the  hearer  leaves  the  threshold  of  the  Church,  he  should 
enter  upon  that  glorious  course  !  Why  does  he  not? 
This  stupendous  truth  of  the  Gospel  message — great 
enough  to  revolutionize  the  world,  to  renovate  society, 
to  regenerate  the  heart,  to  fill  the  man  with  the  very 
light  and  joy  of  heaven — why  does  it  avail  him  so 
little  ?  Because,  verily  he  does  not  believe  it !  Because 
he  has  no  inward  sense  of  things  divine  and  immortal, 
that  makes  it  all  a  reality.  An  evil  heart  of  unbelief 
it  is,  that  spreads  mist  and  darkness,  doubt  and  indif- 
ference over  the  whole  glorious  theme. 

But  again,  Avhat  is  to  penetrate  and  scatter  this 
cloud  of  unbelief?  It  is  attention ;  fixed,  piercing 
thought  and  devoted  meditation.  This,  by  the  law  of 
our  nature,  and  by  every  law  of  the  Gospel,  is  the 
grand  means  of  impression.  Why  does  not  every  man 
give  this  attention  ?  Why  does  not  every  man  say, 
"  I  will  think  and  read  ;  I  will  consider  ;  I  will  pray ; 
I  will  earnestly  seek  the  great  blessing  of  the  beati- 
tudes ?"  Again,  I  say,  because  he  does  not  believe  in 
the  thing  thus  urged  upon  his  attention.  Ah !  no ; 
men  do  not  believe  in  being  good.  We  hear  much  of 
the  great  and  distant  things  they  do  not  believe  in. 
They  do  not  believe  in  heaven,  nor  hell,  nor  eternity. 
I  would  that  they  believed  in  being  good  ! 

There  is  a  worldly  nonchalance  about  this  matter 
of  religion,  most  painful,  most  discouraging  to  witness. 
In  this  deepest  concern  of  their  nature,  men  suffer  them- 
selves to  be  governed  by  every  sort  of  worldly  policy ; 
by  the  wishes  of  friends,  by  the  fashions  of  society,  by 
the  vainest  and  idlest  considerations.  Religion  ! — 
what  in  the  world,  is  so  cast  aside  among  the  things  of 
convenience  and  favour  and  fashion  and  utter  folly  ? 
Yes,  religion  is,  as  it  were,  foolishness  to  multitudes. 
They  do  not  feel  its  serious  import.  They  do  not 
28* 


330 

believe  in  it.  Business  they  believe  in.  Pleasure  they 
believe  in.  Houses  and  lands,  luxuries  and  honours, 
they  believe  in.  On  these  points  they  are  decided 
enough.  Present  a  chance  for  acquisition  of  property ; 
and  though  it  be  necessary  to  take  a  distant  journey, 
or  to  spend  all  day  and  all  night  at  the  ware-house,  or 
to  peril  health,  and  yet — let  family  and  children 
and  society  and  the  world  say  what  they  Avill — yet 
they  will  do  it ;  they  must  do  it.  They  take  a  firm 
stand  and  a  decided  step.  It  is  a  serious  interest,  and 
they  must  attend  to  it.  But  religion  ! — why,  it  is 
sotnebody's  notion  I  That  is  their  account  of  it. 
Religion  ! — it  seems  as  if  the  very  substance  of  the 
thing  dissolved  away  into  nothing ;  as  if  the  letters  that 
compose  the  word,  lost  their  coherence,  and  sunk  away 
like  fading  points  of  light  in  a  thickening  mist.  How 
can  men  be  fixed  and  resolute  about  a  thing  seen  in 
that  way  !  They  cannot.  And  so  a  man  says,  with 
an  air  of  oracular  Avisdom,  "  It  is  no  small  thing  to  take 
a  decided  stand  in  the  matter  !"  or,  "  It  is  no  small 
thing  to  take  a  decided  stand  in  an  unpopular  cause  or 
communion  !"  Oh  !  heaven,  why  does  he  not  feel  that 
conscience  is  no  small  thing  ;  that  his  spiritual  im- 
provement is  no  small  thing  ;  but  is  the  infinite  thing? 
Because,  he  does  not  believe  in  that  conscience ;  he 
does  not  feel  in  himself,  how  priceless  that  spiritual 
improvement  is. 

And  thus  again  the  reason  why  he  does  not  put  forth 
that  deepest  act  of  all — the  solemn  and  determined 
effort  to  be  good  and  pure — why  he  does  not  work  out 
his  own  salvation ;  the  reason,  I  say,  is,  that  in  this 
depth  of  the  heart  where  all  human  power  lies,  there 
are  no  hving  springs  of  faith.  All  is  cold  and  barren 
there.  That  which  should  be  the  deepest  soil  from 
which  fair  and  heavenly  graces  spring,  is  a  dead  lump 


JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH.  33"! 

of  obstinate  unbelief  and  indifference.  The  spirit  of 
God  never  breathes  upon  that  sterile  spot.  It  is  closed 
and  barred  up  against  the  sacred  influence,  by  pride 
and  vanity,  by  cares  and  pleasures,  by  ambition  and 
gain.  And  the  worldly  man  chooses  it  should  be  so. 
There  is  no  faith  in  him  to  make  him  think  that  there 
is  any  thing  better.  And  so  every  thing  that  might 
help  him,  is  resisted  ;  the  pleading  of  truth,  the  demand 
for  attention,  the  call  to  effort. 

If  now  it  be  asked,  in  fine,  vvhat  good  end  is  to  be 
served,  by  saying  and  showing  all  this  J  I  answer, 
first,  that  it  vindicates  the  Gospel  demand  for  faith  as 
pertinent  and  reasonable.  This  is  already  sufficiently 
apparent.  But  I  answer,  further,  that  it  shows  the 
defect,  the  fault  to  be  in  us,  and  not  in  the  motives 
which  religion  itself  proposes.  There  is  power  enough 
in  religion  to  save  us, — God  ever  helping  it, — if  we 
would  let  it  work  within  us.  It  is  sufficient  to  make 
us  happy  and  blessed,  if  we  would  give  it  a  trial.  No 
man  ever  truly  gave  it  a  trial  and  denied  its  power. 
Yes,  it  is  all  true — that  which  we  profess  to  believe, 
and  do  not  believe.  It  is  as  true,  as  if  the  whole  horizon 
around  us  and  the  whole  heaven  above  us,  Avere  filled 
with  shapes,  with  pictures  of  the  solemn  and  glorious 
verities  of  our  faith.  It  is  as  true  that  sin  in  the  heart 
will  eat  and  canker,  poison  and  destroy,  as  if  a  man 
could  lay  his  finger  upon  the  very  spot  where  this 
awful  work  is  going  on.  It  is  as  true  that  the  good  deed 
is  a  glorious  and  blessed  thing,  as  if  when  it  is  done,  a 
halo  of  heavenly  light  should  instantly  surround  it. 
It  is  as  true,  that  penitence,  purity,  humility,  goodness, 
self-sacrifice,  in  the  heart,  is  the  divinest  joy  and  glory, 
as  if  all  the  treasures  and  splendours  of  the  universe 
drew  near  and  gathered  around,  to  pay  it  homage. 
The  faith  of  the  heart  is  a  stronger  assurance  than  all 


332  ON    FAITH,    ETC. 

the  visions  of  the  outward  sense.  When  fortune  smiles 
around  me,  I  may  think  that  I  am  happy ;  when  sanctity 
and  love  breathe  within  me,  I  know  it.  And  therefore 
it  is  certain  and  it  is  evident,  that  he  who  believeth 
shall  be  saved,  shall  be  blessed  in  God  and  in  the  love 
of  God  ;  and  that  he  who  believeth  not,  must  fail  of 
the  infinite  blessing,  the  only  blessing,  the  blessing  of 
the  beatitudes  ! 


THAT  ERRORS  IN  THEOLOGY 

HAVE  SPRUNG  FROM  FALSE  PRINCIPLES 

OF  REASONING. 


**  O  Timothy t  keep  that  which  is  committed  to  thy  trust ;  avoiding 
profane  and  vain  babblings  and  oppositions  of  science  falsely 
so  called  ,■"  (i.  e.,  vain  disputes  about  words,  and  scholastic  sub- 
tilties  ;)  "  which  some  professing,  have  erred  concerning  the 
faith."—!  Timothy,  vi.  20,  21. 

That  errors  in  theology  have  sprung  from  false 
principles  of  reasoning,  is  the  hint  in  the  text,  from 
Avhich  I  shall  draw  the  subject  of  my  present  dis- 
course. It  is  a  large  theme  ;  it  will  lead  me  to  con- 
sider some  important  departments  of  theology ;  and  I 
must  bespeak  your  patience. 

If  I  were  called  upon  to  say  on  what  subject  the 
greatest  errors  had  prevailed  among  mankind,  I  should 
answer,  undoubtedly  on  that  of  religion.  In  this  I 
suppose  all  thinking  men  are  agreed.  Paganism,  for 
example,  has  embodied  more  enormous  errors  than 
ever  were  found  in  philosophy.  To  place  the  earth, 
for  instance,  at  the  centre  of  the  solar  system,  is  a  small 
mistake  compared  with  setting  up  a  hideous  idol  to 
represent  the  living  God,  or  wath  sacrificing  human 
victims  to  that  idol.  No  delusions  so  mournful  have 
ever  overspread  the  world  as  those  on  demonology  and 
witchcraft,  the  Inquisition,  the  purchased  absolution 


334 

of  sins,  and  the  unchallenged  supremacy  of  the  spirit- 
ual power. 

If,  again,  I  were  called  upon  to  say,  from  what  sub- 
ject, error  would  most  slowly  disappear,  I  should  still 
answer,  from  that  of  religion  ;  and  for  this  simple  and 
sufficient  reason,  that  on  no  subject  have  men's  minds 
so  little  freedom.  Emancipation  from  error  is  always 
achieved  by  free  and  courageous  inquiry  ;  but  the  arm 
that  is  stretched  out  into  the  spiritual  realm,  is  para- 
lyzed by  fear.  To  tell  men  that  they  dare  not  think 
freely  on  religion,  would  provoke,  it  is  very  likel)^,  a 
hasty  denial.  But  the  very  conditions  of  all  past  re- 
ligious investigation,  involve  this  inevitable  conse- 
quence. Can  men  think  freely,  under  peril  of  eternal 
perdition  for  erring  in  their  thought  ?  Can  they  freely 
examine  the  cairns  of  a  revered  church,  or  the  tenets 
of  an  exclusive  orthodoxy,  which  says,  "  every  step  of 
departure  from  me,  is  a  step  out  of  the  only  pale  of 
safety  ?"  It  is  clearly  impossible.  And  therefore  it  is 
not  to  be  thought  surprising,  if  the  religion  of  the  world 
has  been  and  is  involved  in  deeper  error,  than  any 
other  subject  of  its  thought.  There  have  been  dark 
ages  in  science ;  but  there  have  been  darker  ages 
in  religion.  From  science  the  darkness  has  passed 
away.      Has  it  passed  aw^ay  from  religion  ? 

This  leads  me  to  another  observation.  While  there 
has  been  a  grand  reform  in  science,  a  revision  of  the 
theories  of  the  dark  ages,  there  has  been  no  similar 
reform,  on  a  great  scale,  in  religion.  Lord  Bacon  led 
the  reform  in  science ;  but  there  has  been  no  Lord 
Bacon  in  religion.  Luther  was  not  a  reformer  of  that 
cast.  No  deep  and  philosophical  inquiry,  but  only  an 
earnest  and  effectual  protest  against  religious  domina- 
tion, was  his  mission.  Some  freedom  for  religion  he 
gained  ;    some  partial  change  in  doctrine  he  effected ; 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     335 

but  there  was  no  free  and  thorough  investigation  of 
the  nature  of  rehgion  in  his  time.  A  poRtical,  not  a 
doctrinal  reformation  was  the  great  change  which  he 
accompHshed. 

I  say  there  has  been  no  Lord  Bacon  in  rehgion,  no 
novum  orgamiin  religionis.  And  this  I  say  without 
any  prejudice  to  the  eminent  persons  who,  within 
the  last  three  centuries,  have  attempted  to  reform  the 
religion  of  their  age.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  even  with 
equal  merit,  they  could  not  have  equal  success.  If  a 
new  discovery  be  made  in  chemistry  or  astronomy,  all 
the  world  is  comparatively  ready  to  receive  it.  But 
let  a  new  proposition  be  brought  forward  in  religion, 
and  not  only  is  it  less  susceptible,  from  its  very  nature, 
of  demonstration,  but  a  host  of  prejudices  and  fears  is 
arrayed  against  it.  Science,  it  is  true,  has  sometimes 
met  with  a  hard  fate  in  the  world ;  but  religion  has 
never  met  with  any  other.  One  Galileo  has  been  im- 
prisoned ;  but  ten  thousands  of  heretics  have  been  cast 
into  dungeons,  there  to  waste  away  the  slow,  forgotten 
years ;  unless,  as  has  been  common,  the  malice  of 
their  persecutors  demanded  the  infliction  and  the  sight 
of  sharper  agonies.  Little  chance  was  there  for  free 
thought  to  advance  under  such  auspices  ;  and  little 
has  it  advanced,  even  till  now. 

In  fact,  has  the  true  method  of  inquiry  ever  yet  been 
fairly  introduced,  into  the  prevalent  theology  of  Chris- 
tendom ?  Rejecting  all  presumptuous  and  precon- 
ceived theories.  Lord  Bacon  proposed  to  enter  the  field 
of  nature,  and  to  ask  Avhat  are  the  facts,  and  then 
upon  this  basis,  to  build  up  the  true  theory.  But  in 
theology,  a  totally  opposite  method,  i.  e.  the  old  schol- 
astic method,  has  been  pursued.  Theories  have  taken 
precedence  of  facts,  not  facts  of  theories.  What  are 
our  modern  creeds  but  theories  ?   What  are  the  Thirty- 


336 

nine  Articles,  and  the  Westminster  Catechism,  and  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  but  theories  of  religion  ?  I  do 
not  deny  that  theories  have  their  place  in  philosoph)^, 
and  might  have  in  religion  ;  i.  e.  as  mere  hypotheses  to 
explain  the  facts.  Only  as  mere  suppositions  are  they 
philosophically  safe.  But  what  are  they  in  religion  ? 
Minatory  creeds,  catechisms  for  children.  I  pray  you 
to  conceive  of  it.  Theories  in  philosophy  have  been 
held  to  be  perilous  enough — bars  to  progress  ;  but  on 
what  other  subject  besides  theology  were  theories  ever 
taught  to  children?  Nay,  more,  not  only  do  modern 
creeds  and  catechisms  thus  forestall  our  decisions,  but 
the  Bible  itself  is  placed  in  a  position  which  is  hostile 
to  the  true,  philosophical,  inductive  method  of  inquiry. 
The  Bible  is  regarded  not  merely  as  throwing  the 
light  of  teaching  and  interpretation  upon  the  paths  of 
our  religious  inquiries,  but  as  the  only  source  of  light; 
not  merely  as  illustrating  the  facts  of  religious  experi- 
ence, but  as  furnishing  all  the  facts  ;  not  merely  as  a 
guide  in  the  field  of  investigation,  but  as  the  field  too. 
The  theologian  sits  down  to  the  reading  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, disdaining,  repudiating,  abhorring  all  philoso- 
phical explanation  from  Avithout.  His  aim,  he  says, 
is  a  single  one.  He  boasts  that  he  takes  the  sentences 
of  holy  writ  just  as  they  are ;  that  he  explains  each 
sentence  by  itself — not  even  admitting  any  "  analogy 
of  faith  "  to  guide  him ;  that  one  text  for  a  doctrine  is 
as  good  as  a  thousand  ;  and,  in  fine,  that  his  nature, 
his  reason,  his  conscience,  are  to  bow  down  and  to  be 
as  nothing,  in  the  presence  of  this  record.  This  is  the 
very  chivalry  of  theology ;  to  make  of  the  man,  the 
inquirer,  nothing ;  and  of  the  matter  to  be  inquired 
into,  every  thing. 

But  let  us  consider  more  particularly,  for  a  moment, 
what  is  the  true  method  of  inquiry.     It  is  to  study 


falsp::  principles  of   reasoning.         337 

facts  in  religion  as  we  study  facts  in  nature  ;  and  upon 
them  to  build  up  our  system  of  doctrine.  It  is  to  hold 
theory  in  strict  subjection  to  facts.  Theory,  hypothe- 
sis, has  its  place  in  philosophy ; — but  what  place  ? 
That,  I  repeat,  of  mere  supposition  ;  liable  always  to  be 
modified  by  the  facts.  It  is  natural  for  us  to  seek  ex- 
planation ;  i.  e.,  to  frame  a  general  scheme  or  plan  of 
thought  or  belief,  under  which  the  known  facts  may 
arrange  themselves,  and  by  which  they  may  be  ac- 
counted for.  Thus  there  have  been  theories  in  geo- 
logy ;  one,  for  instance,  which  explained  the  structure 
and  condition  of  the  earth  by  the  action  of  fire ;  an- 
other, by  the  action  of  water.  But  what  rational 
geologist  ever  reasoned  as  if  his  theory  were  to  govern 
the  facts?  So  in  the  study  generally,  whether  of  na- 
ture or  of  the  mind.  What  true  philosopher  makes  it 
his  business  to  bend  the  facts  to  his  theory,  or,  when 
some  new  and  hostile  fact  is  presented,  permits  hhn- 
self  to  say,  "  that  is  opposed  to  one  of  my  five  points, 
or  of  my  thirty-nine  articles,  and  therefore  it  cannot 
be ;  nay,  the  assertion  of  it  shall  be  punished  as  here- 
sy ?"  Or,  when  some  irreconcileable  contradiction  of 
ideas  is  charged  upon  his  theory,  what  philosopher  is 
permitted  to  say,  "Ah!  that  is  a  mystery ;  and  it  is 
only  your  proud  reason  that  resists  ;  which  God  will 
confound !"'  But  is  the  true  method  one  thing  in  phi- 
losophy, and  another  in  religion  ?  That  is  the  grand, 
fatal,  false,  unphilosophical  presumption  on  which  most 
religious  argument  has  proceeded  ;  that  the  ordinary, 
philosophical  method  of  reasoning  may  not  be  applied 
to  religion.  And  the  whole  weight  of  church  power  for 
ao:es  has  been  brought  to  crush  down  facts  beneath 
theories,  and  simple  inquiry  beneath  authoritative 
creeds.  And  every  martyr's  stake,  and  fire,  and  blood, 
have  been  witnesses  to  that  stupendous  perversion. 
29 


338 

For  this  is  no  matter  of  mere  speculation.  Religious 
freedom,  freedom  to  think  on  religion — this  highest 
blessing  on  earth — has  paid  the  dearest  price.  No- 
thing on  earth  has  cost  such  pain.  It  has  brought  not 
peace,  but  a  sword.  Its  baptism  has  been,  not  in  joy, 
but  in  agony.  Its  keen  and  piercing  eye  has  looked 
out  into  the  world,  has  looked  out  to  eternity,  be- 
neath bloody  brows,  and  from  eye-lids  seared  with 
fire.  "  I  have  experiences,"  says  the  confessor,  '•  con- 
victions, facts,  texts,  that  do  not  agree  with  your  theo- 
ry, your  creed."  "  Go,"  has  been  the  answer,  "  go  and 
tell  us  if  you  can  see  them  through  the  living  flame  ! , 
Or  go  and  brood  over  them  in  the  loneliness  of  uni- 
versal desertion  and  obloquy  !" 

But  where  now,  let  us  ask  again,  are  the  religious 
facts  to  be  found  and  studied  ?  I  answer,  in  human 
nature,  and  in  the  Bible  ;  not  in  one  alone,  but  in  both. 
Nay  more ;  the  relation  between  these  two  sources  of 
knowledge  is  such  that  human  nature  and  experience 
must  interpret  the  book.  "  The  Bible,  the  Bible  " — 
be  it  our  religion ;  but  the  Bible  as  against  theories, 
creeds,  traditions,  all  coercive,  combined  power ;  not  as 
against  individual  human  experience  ;  not  as  distinct 
from  that  experience. 

Consider,  whether  to  make  it  so,  be  not  fatal  alike 
to  every  claim,  whether  of  Scripture  or  reason.  The 
Bible  is  predicated  upon  human  experience,  is  based 
upon  it,  addresses  that  experience,  adopts  its  very  lan- 
guage, uses  words  which  could  have  no  meaning  a( 
all,  unless  their  interpretation  were  found  in  the  human 
heart.  The  Bible,  we  say,  is  a  revelation  concerning 
God's  nature  and  man's  duty.  But  it  could  be  no  re- 
velation at  all.  to  a  race  which  had  no  ideas  of  that 
nature  and  that  duty.  When  it  said  to  man,  "Be 
pure,  humble,  upright,  good,"  it  went  upon  the  pre- 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING. 


339 


Bumption  that  he  had  ah'eady  some  sense  and  experi- 
ence of  these  quahties  ;  else  it  had  been  as  words  to 
the  deaf  Its  mtent  was  to  elevate  this  experience, 
not  to  supersede  it.  To  set  it  aside,  to  fling  it  out  of 
the  account,  were  suicidal,  fatal  to  the  end,  subversive 
of  all  just  principles  of  reasoning. 

Suppose  that  a  revelation  were  given  concerning 
nature  without  us.  To  interpret  the  revelation,  should 
we  not  be  obhged  to  consult  nature,  and  to  give  it  a 
fair  hearing.  Should  we  say,  "  It  is  a  coarse,  material 
clod,  and  before  the  divine  hght  of  revelation,  it  is  as 
nothing  ;  not  worth  listening  to  ?"  And  if  the  facts  of 
nature  seemed  to  conflict  with  the  words  of  the  Book, 
should  we  not  say,  "The  discrepancy  must  be  removed, 
by  some  new  understanding  of  the  facts,  or  better  in- 
terpretion  of  the  words  T  And  if  the  facts,  after  all 
inquiry,  stood  open,  unquestionable,  irrefragable,  against 
our  interpretation,  should  we  not  feel  that  the  mterpre- 
tation  must  inevitably  give  way  ? 

And  so  with  regard  to  the  Bible  and  the  facts  ot 
human  nature  ;    is  it  to  nullify  those  facts  ?     Was  it 
intended  to  foreclose  and  seal  up  all  other  sources  of 
spiritual  knowledge  ?     Is  the  Bible  to  stand  by  itself, 
apart  and  alone  ;  and  are  its  declarations  to  be  inter- 
preted without  any  aid  of  human  experience  ?     If  so, 
I  pray  to  be  told  what  interpreting  means.     I  interpret 
what  I  do  not  know,  by  what  I  do  know.     I  interpret 
the  book  without  me,  by  the  reason,  conscience,  expe- 
rience within  me.     It   is  not  possible   for  me  to  do 
otherwise.     Is  it  said  that  divine  aid  is  to  be  sought, 
to  assist  our  reason  and  conscience  ?     It  is  true.     But 
what  is  meant  by  aiding  any  faculty  ?     To  supersede, 
discard,  deny  it— is  that  aiding  it? 

No,  the  Bible  is  to  throw  light  on  human  nature,  not  to 
blot  it  out  or  to  treat  it  as  if  it  were  a  blot  or  a  blank, 


340  ERRORS 

or  a  mass  of  darkness.  It  is  to  elicit  those  truths  that 
he  deep  in  humanity,  and  not  to  cast  it  aside  as  having 
no  trutli  in  it.  It  is  kindly  and  generously  to  cultivate 
the  soul,  and  not  to  crush  it  down  to  ignominy  and 
despair.  Nay  more,  if  there  is  or  seems  to  be,  any 
certain  fact  in  human  nature,  the  interpreter  is  to 
pause  upon  that  fact,  and  to  take  care  how  he  explains 
any  thing  against  it.  If  it  he  a  fact,  established  and 
sure,  nothing  in  the  record  of  truth  can  be  against  it. 
The  theologian,  for  a  while,  stood  against  the  facts  of 
science,  the  science  of  astronomy,  the  true  theory  of 
the  solar  system ;  but  he  found  at  length,  that  rolling 
of  worlds  would  not  obey  the  laws  of  criticism,  and 
criticism  was  obliged  to  yield.  And  so  against  the  fact 
of  moral  freedom  in  man,  he  has  held  dogmas  and 
theories,  but  he  will  find  that  those  dogmas  and  theo- 
ries must  give  way.  And  thus  also,  if  there  be  any 
thing  in  his  constructions  of  the  Trinity,  the  atone- 
ment or  of  human  depravity,  which  directly  conflict 
with  unquestionable  facts  in  the  mind,  he  may  be  sure 
that  those  constructions  must  share  the  same  fate. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  carry  these  principles  into  a 
brief  survey  of  certain  questions  in  Theology. 

The  first  question  to  which  I  shall  invite  your  atten- 
tion is  that  which  has  been  so  long  agitated  concerning 
the  nature  of  God  ;  the  question,  that  is  to  say,  whether 
God  exists  in  Trinity  or  in  Unity ;  or  whether  Trinity 
and  Unity,  as  held  in  Theology,  are  compatible  with 
each  other. 

To  proceed  inductively  with  this  inquiry,  to  proceed 
on  the  ground  of  knowledge  and  not  of  presumption, 
we  should  ask  for  the  revelation  of  God  first,  in  our 
own  minds  ;  secondly,  in  nature  ;  and,  thirdly,  in  Scrip- 
ture. Now  from  each  of  these  we  gain  the  conviction 
that  God  is  one.     And  when  we  say  he  is  one,  we 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     341 

mean  that  he  is  one  self-conscious  Agent,  one  and  the 
self-same  Creator,  Sustainer  and  Benefactor,  the  living 
and  the  only  living  and  true  God.  We  mean  this,  or 
we  mean  nothing  that  is  intelligible  in  the  case.  There 
are  different  kinds  of  Unity.  There  is  a  unity  of  plan, 
of  powers,  of  principles.  That  is  one  thing.  But  when 
we  speak  of  unity  in  a  being,  we  mean  that  he  is  self- 
conscious  ;  conscious  that  he  is  himself  and  no  other. 
The  being  that  can  say,  "  I,"  cannot  turn  to  another 
anci  say  "  you,"  and  yet  mean  himself  Now  it  is  in 
this  sense,  if  we  ascribe  personality  to  God,  that  we 
must  say,  he  is  one. 

But  may  not  this  unity  admit  of  some  kind  of  modi- 
fication ?  May  we  not  conceive  of  God  as  one  in  one 
sense,  and  three  in  another  ?  Certainly  we  may  :  and 
not  only  as  three  but  as  more  than  three.  As  many 
attributes,  as  many  modes  of  action  as  he  has,  may  he 
be  in  this  sense,  more  than  one.  But  can  we  conceive 
him  to  be  one  and  three  in  such  a  sense,  as  to  lay  a 
foundation  for  the  application  of  the  personal  pronouns, 
I,  thou,  he  :  so  that  one  portion  of  his  being  can  say  to 
another  portion  of  his  being,  "  I  send  you,"  or,  "  I  com- 
mission you  to  send  forth  hi7n  T  This  I  am  obliged  by 
the  very  principles  of  my  mind,  of  my  nature,  to  deny. 
It  is  inconceivable  and  incredible,  because  it  involves 
an  inevitable  contradiction  of  ideas.  It  is  not  some- 
thing which  we  refuse  to  believe  because  it  is  myste- 
rious, but  which  we  cannot  believe  because  it  is  impos- 
sible. There  is  no  possible  conception  of  an  intelligent, 
and  conscious  being,  which  will  permit  him  to  com- 
mission or  to  send  himself,  to  do  that,  which  he  himself 
does  not  do.  You  see  that  the  very  language  in  which 
such  a  proposition  is  announced,  creates  an  inextricable 
confusion  and  contradiction  of  thought. 

But  observe  now,  that  this  is  the  Trinity  that  is  taught 
29* 


342 

to  as  and  urged  upon  our  faith.  The  question  is  not 
whether  God  may  exist  in  some  triuned  form  ;  a 
question  abstractly  of  no  interest  to  us  ;  but  whether 
he  exists  in  that  relation  of  Father,  Son  and  Spirit, 
which  is  recognized  in  the  prevailing  creeds.  These 
three,  according  to  those  creeds,  devised  a  scheme  of 
redemption  in  heaven.  They  assumed  different  offices, 
acted  different  parts  in  its  accomplishment.  The 
Father  sent  the  Son  on  this  mission.  The  Holy  Spirit 
followed  to  make  it  effectual.  Here  are  represented 
three  beings.  Suppose  it  were  said  that  they  held 
"  sweet  and  ineffable  society  together."  This  ivas  said 
in  a  former  age  :  it  was  the  theme  of  many  pious  rap- 
tures. The  idea  is  now  discarded,  because  it  is  found 
to  be  at  variance  with  the  Unity.  But  the  scruple,  it 
appears  to  me,  is  unnecessary.  Three  persons,  of 
whom  one  can  send  another,  and  the  third  can  go  forth 
to  accomplish  their  design,  are  as  truly  three  beings, 
as  if  they  had  friendship  and  held  converse  with  each 
other. 

It  pains  my  reverence  for  things  sacred,  to  speak 
with  this  freedom  of  the  nature  of  the  Infinite  Being. 
But  I  am  driven  into  it  by  the  exigencies  of  this  argu- 
ment. And  I  must  be  permitted  also  to  say,  that  I  do 
not  feel  myself  to  be  speaking  so  much  of  the  divine 
nature,  as  of  the  conceptions  which  men  entertain  of 
it.  And  I  must  press  you  to  consider  that  these  are  the 
prevailing  conceptions  of  the  Trinity.  It  will  not  do  for 
any  one  to  shrink  back  or  to  withdraw  this  subject  into 
the  shadows  of  obscurity  and  mysticism,  and  to  say,  "  I 
do  not  profess  to  understand  it ;  doubtless  it  is  a  mys- 
tery ;  all  that  I  know  is,  that  so  I  am  taught,  and  so  I 
believe."  Nay,  I  reply,  but  you  do  profess  to  under- 
stand it  to  this  extent ;  that  you  have  distinct  concep- 
tions of  the  three  distinct  persons  ;  and  so  distinct  are 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     343 

these  persons  of  the  Trinity  in  your  idea  of  them,  that 
no  power  of  human  reason  or  imagination  can  make 
them  one  being. 

Nor  with  the  Bible  in  your  hands,  can  you  blend 
this  distinctness  into  confusion.  The  Son,  sent  into 
the  world  by  the  Father  ;  the  Son  united  to  humanity, 
and  thus  constituting  a  peculiar  person,  God-man, 
and  in  this  character  labourino^  and  sufferino^  to  work 
out  our  salvation :  the  Son,  I  say,  offering  a  sacrifice 
on  earth  to  the  Father  in  heaven,  is  a  distinct  actor,  a 
distinct  being  to  your  thought,  nor  can  you  conceive 
of  him  otherwise.  And  this  conception,  I  say,  which 
you  cannot  help,  is  fatal  to  the  Unity. 

Let  the  believer  in  the  Trinity  bear  with  me  ;  for  I 
mean  him  no  disrespect.  He  will  say  that  he  does 
believe  both  in  the  Trinity  and  Unity.  Let  us  in  this 
matter,  look  beneath  words  for  one  moment.  When 
he  thinks  at  one  time  of  the  Father  as  God,  and  at 
another  of  the  Son  as  God,  and  at  another  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  God  ;  he  is  not  necessarily  a  Trinitarian. 
At  no  one  of  these  times,  probably,  does  he  think  of 
more  than  one  of  these  persons  as  God.  So  the  Swe- 
denborgian  worships  Jesus  Christ  as  God,  and  as  the 
only  God ;  and  he  is  a  Unitarian.  Again,  when  he 
conceives  of  the  one  only,  self-conscious,  Infinite  Being, 
as  manifesting  himself  now  in  the  Father,  now  in  the 
Son,  and  now  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  is  not  a  Trinita- 
rian but  a  Sabellian.  And  when  he  says  in  his  prayer, 
"  O  holy,  adorable  and  ever-blessed  Trinity,"  still  is 
he  not  worshipping  a  name,  rather  than  what  the 
Trinity  means  in  theology  ?  Could  he  pray  in  this 
manner  ?  "  O  Father,  Christ,  and  Holy  Ghost,  I  im- 
plore each  of  you  to  help  me  ;  I  pray  Thee,  Christ,  to 
intercede  for  me ;  Thee,  Father,  to  pardon  me,  and  Thee, 
Holy  Ghost,  to  apply  the  benefits  of  redemption  to  my 


344  ERRORS    IN    THEOLOGY,    FROM 

soul.  I  beseech  you  to  combine  your  respective  coun- 
sels and  to  employ  your  respective  interpositions  for  my 
relief."  This  Avould  be  a  prayer  in  accordance  with 
dogmatic  Trinitarianism  ;  but  I  beheve  that  such  a 
prayer  has  seldom  or  never  been  offered  in  the  world. 

The  dogma  of  the  Trinity,  I  say,  destroys  every 
kind  of  unity  that  can  be  conceived  of  in  an  intelligent 
being.  And  if  it  does,  I  maintain  that  it  must  be  given 
up.  We  cannot  believe  in  an  essential  contradiction. 
Here  stands  a  fact  in  the  mind,  which,  like  a  fact  in 
nature,  like  the  order  of  the  solar  system,  is  not  to  be 
set  aside  by  any  interpretation.  That  three  self-con- 
scious persons  are  one  and  the  same  self-conscious 
Being,  we  cannot  believe.  Once  it  was  held  that 
absurdity  is  no  bar  to  faith ;  nay,  "  the  greater  the 
absurdity  the  greater  the  faith  :"  this  was  the  hardness 
of  the  old  Theology.  But  philosophy  has  been  slowly 
wresting  from  theology  the  admission,  that  absurdity 
is  essentially  incredible. 

An  attempt,  indeed,  has  been  made  to  show  that  we 
can  believe  in  such  a  contradiction,  by  alleging  that 
there  are  similar  contradictions  in  science.  But  the 
instances  cited,  as  might  be  anticipated,  fall  under  the 
head  of  mysteries,  not  absurdities.  There  are  para- 
doxes ;  i.  e.  there  are  ideas,  there  are  pure  mathemati- 
cal calculations,  which,  when  applied  to  matter,  in- 
volve us  in  inextricable  confusion  of  thought :  but  it 
is  a  new  thing  to  say,  that  there  are  "  irreconcilable 
contradictions  "  in  science.  The  strongest  instance  of 
the  sort  is  taken  from  the  infinite  divisibility  of  matter. 
A  world  and  a  grain  of  sand  are  infinitely  divisible  ; 
i.  e.  they  can  be  divided  into  an  infinite  number  of 
parts.  But  infinites  are  equal.  Therefore  the  world 
and  the  grain  are  of  equal  size.  Nay,  why  stop  here? 
Therefore  both  the  world  and  the  grain  of  sand  are  in- 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     345 

finite  •  for  that  which  consists  of  an  infinite  number  of 
parts,' must  be  infinitely  large.  Infinites!  infinites  I 
is  the  obscurity  which  rests  upon  that  which  has  no 
hmits,  to  bhnd  us  to  a  plain  and  palpable  contradiction, 
presented  to  us  by  human  minds,  within  the  confines 

of  a  human  creed  ?*  •    .      r     i  a 

Presented  to  us,  I  say,  by  human  mmds ;  for  1  deny 
that  any  such  doctrine  is  presented  to  us  by  the  divme 
Mind.  In  other  words,  we  deny,  with  the  utmost 
strength  of  conviction,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
is  taught  in  the  Scriptures. 

With  regard  to  the  argument  from  the  Scriptures  it 
will  not  be  expected  in  a  discourse  of  this  nature,  that 
I  should  enter  upon  it.  I  will  only  make  two  briet 
observations,  in  consonance  with  the  views  upon  which 

I  am  insisting.  .  ,. 

When  we  take  up  the  New  Testament,  we  immedi- 
ately begin  to  read  of  Jesus.     He  is  the  great  subject 
of  the  book.     He  is  a  child  ;  he  is  a  youth  ;  he  grows 
up  to  maturity  ;  he  teaches  the  people  ;  he  is  the  most 
devout  and  pure  of  all  that  ever  dwelt  on  earth  ;  he 
lives;  he  dies;  he  ascends  to  heaven-"  to  his  Father 
and  our  Father,  to  his  God  and  our  God."     Now  had 
not  the  early  Platonizing  fathers  introduced  among 
the  subtilties  of  their  philosophy,  the  doctrme  of  the 
Trinity ;  had  we,  in  these  more  enlightened  times, 
never  heard  of  the  Trinity  ;  had  we  been  left  simply 
to  take  the  impression  of  the  New  Testament  just  as  it 
is  ;  I  suppose  nothing  could  have  equalled  the  amaze- 
ment with  which  we  should  have  heard  it  asseiled; 
that  this  Jesus  was  God  ;  the  very  God  who  sent  him 

*  It  is  as  if,  because  matter  is  infinitely  divisible,  we  were  requir- 
ed to  believe  that  a  world  and  a  grain  of  sand  are  of  equal  size  ;  or 
to  state  the  parallel  more  exactly-since  there  can  be  but  onemfi- 
nite-th^t  both  the  world  and  the  grain  of  sand  are  one  and  the 
same  identical  substance. 


346  ERRORS    IN    THEOLOGY,    FROM 

into  the  world  ;  the  Creator  of  the  very  earth  on  which 
he  walked,  of  the  very  men  who  put  him  to  death ! 

My  second  observation  I  wish  to  preface  with  a  sin- 
gle remark.  It  is  this  :  we  are  to  arrive  at  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Evangelists  and  Apostles  through  their  lan- 
guage ;  just  as  we  are  to  come  at  the  meaning  of  any 
other  writers  through  their  language.  Inspiration  did 
not  change  the  natural  style  of  those  men ;  for  each  one 
has  his  own.  This,  among  the  learned,  is  now  gene- 
rally admitted.  My  observation,  then,  is  to  the  follow- 
ing effect :  that  is  to  say,  I  loill  take  the  biography  of 
any  great  itian  that  has  lived,  and  Iivill  draio  from 
it  the  same  kind  of  evidence  for  his  divinity,  as  that 
on  which  the  Tri7iitarian  relies  in  proof  of  the  Deity 
of  Jesus.  "  He  shall  be  supreme  and  alone  in  the 
love  and  confidence  "  of  the  people,  is  a  language  ap- 
plied to  a  statesman  of  our  own.  Had  these  identical 
words  been  found  in  the  New  Testament,  applied  to 
Christ,  how  certainly  would  they  have  been  quoted  in 
support  of  his  divine  claims  !  "  Supreme  and  alone 
in  men's  love  and  confidence  ?"  That  is  the  very  de- 
scription of  what  is  due  to  God.  Again,  in  a  notice  of 
the  celebrated  Mr.  Pitt,  occurs  the  following  language  : 
"  The  penetration  of  his  mind  was  sagacious,  was  in- 
finite. His  history  is  the  history  of  civilized  nations  ; 
as  his  counsels  influenced  and  directed  every  movement 
in  every  corner  of  the  habitable  globe."  A  penetration 
that  was  infinite  ;  an  influence  that  ruled  the  habita- 
ble world  !  Do  the  proof  texts  of  the  Trinitarian  ar- 
gument contain  stronger  phraseology  than  this  ?  And 
what  does  all  this  prove  7  Why,  that  the  Trinitarian 
constructions  are  forbidden  by  all  just  criticism.  And 
I  do  surely  and  solemnly  aver — indeed  the  case  is  too 
plain  to  admit  of  any  doubt — that  he  who  rejects  this 


FALSE    PRI^X•IPLES    OF    REASONING.  347 

conclusion,  does  so  because  he  holds  that  the  Bible  is 
not  to  be  interpreted  as  other  books  are. 

I  cannot  refrain  from  one  further  observation  upon 
the  Scriptures,  to  show  that  this  rule  of  interpretation, 
and  the  conclusion,  too,  are  strictly  and  expressly  sus- 
tained by  a  rule  of  Bible  criticism  upon  the  Bible  it- 
self. Recollect  that  the  Trinitarian  hj'pothesis  sets 
forth  that  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  was  a  laying  aside 
of  his  God-hke  dignity,  and  that,  on  this  account,  he 
is  represented  as  inferior.  We  should  expect,  then, 
that  when  he  had  accomplished  this  work,  he  would 
re-assume  his  supreme  grandeur.  Listen,  then,  to  the 
following  language ;  enough,  one  would  tliink,  to  set- 
tle the  whole  question  : — "  Then  cometh  the  end, 
when  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the  kingdom  to  God, 
even  the  Father.  For  he  must  reign  till  he  hath  put 
all  enemies  under  his  feet.  But  when  he  saith  all 
things  are  put  under  him,  it  is  manifest  that  he  is  ex- 
cepted, which  did  put  all  things  under  him."  Is  it 
not  amazing  that  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  Deity  should 
be  maintained  against  this  divine  canon  of  criticism. 
As  if  it  were  said,  "  Of  course,  no  one  will  imagine 
that  any  lofty  ascriptions  of  power  and  glory  to  Christ 
are  to  bring  into  question  the  undisputed  supremacy 
over  him,  of  God  himself.  It  is  manifest  that  He  is 
for  ever  to  be  excepted  from  all  such  inferences.''  But 
hear  the  Apostle's  conclusion,  and  then  judge  what  is 
to  be  thought  of  this  hypothesis  of  Christ's  temporary 
and  apparent  inferiority  and  real  equality.  '•  And 
when  all  things  shall  be  subdued  unto  him.  then  shall 
the  Son  also  himself  be  subject  imto  him  that  put  all 
things  under  him  ;  that  God  may  be  all  in  all." 

But  I  must  hasten  to  leave  this  part  of  my  subject. 
So  powerful,  so  overwhelming  has  appeared  to  me  the 
argument  against  the  Trinity,  that  for  years  I  confess 


348        ERRORS  IN  THEOLOGY,  FROM 

I  have  been  looking  for  its  effect  upon  the  churches 
of  England  and  America.  I  have  sometimes  involun- 
tarily said,  "  Is  it  possible  that  what  appears  so  clear 
to  me,  so  unanswerable,  can  go  for  nothing  with  the 
minds  of  others  ?  What  are  the  men  of  England 
and  America  thinking — not  the  clergy  alone,  but  the 
reading  men,  the  scholars,  the  statesmen,  the  educated 
men — what  are  they  thinking  about  this  matter  ?  Or 
do  they  not  think  of  it  at  all  ?  Does  a  great  question 
which  Newton,  and  Locke,  and  Milton,  and  Priestley, 
and  Price  decided  against  them,  seem  to  be  unworthy 
of  their  attention." 

With  this  inquiry  in  my  mind,  I  have  looked  with 
no  little  interest  upon  a  modification  of  the  Trinitarian 
hypothesis,  which  three  distinguished  scholars,  in 
three  different  countries,  Germany,  Great  Britian,  and 
America,  have  presented  to  the  public  attention.* 
The  English  theologian  speaks  of  God,  in  Sabellian 
phrase,  as  "  revealed  in  three  characters,  as  standing 
in  three  relations  to  us,"t  or,  in  other  words,  he  main- 
tains that  the  one  God  has  so  put  his  name  and  dis- 
played his  energy  in  the  Father,  Son  and  Spirit,  that 
each  of  them  may  be  lawfully,  and  is  actually  required 
to  be,  worshipped. t  His  language  is  very  cautious, 
but  as  far  as  I  can  ascertain  its  meaning,  it  would 
seem  that  he  does  not  believe  in  an  Eternal  Son  or 
Eternal  Spirit ;  but  only  that  when  Jesus  Christ  ap- 
peared, and  the  Divine  Spirit  was  poured  out  upon  the 
hearts  of  men,  there  was  such  a  demonstration  of 
God's  power  in  them,  that  they  may  be  lawfully  wor- 
shipped. The  German  theologian,  though  reputed 
Orthodox,  adopts  the  theory  of  Sabellius.     But  he  de- 

*  Schleiermacher,  Archbishop  Whateley,  and  Professor  Stuart, 
t  See  Sermon  on  God's  Abode  with  his  People. 
X  Sfie  Sermon  on  the  name  Emmanuel. 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     349 

nies  that  the  common  view  of  Sabellianism  is  correct. 
This  is  his  exposition  of  it — difficult,  however,  to  dis- 
tinguish, in  any  material  respect,  from  the  common 
view — "  that  the  Trinit}^  exists  as  such,  only  in  relation 
to  the  various  methods  and  spheres  of  action  belong- 
ing to  the  Godhead."  In  governing  the  world  in  all 
its  various  operations  on  finite  beings,  the  Godhead  is 
Father.  As  redeeming,  by  special  operations  in  the 
person  of  Christ,  and  through  him,  it  is  Son.  As  sanc- 
tifying, and  in  all  its  operations  on  the  community  of 
believers,  and  as  a  Unity  in  the  same,  the  Godhead  is 
jSpirit"*  The  distinction,  he  holds,  is  modal,  not  es- 
sential ;  is  not  eternal,  but  began  in  time.  The  Ame- 
rican Professor  is  not  satisfied  with  this  exposition.t 
He  holds  that  "  distinctions  are  co-eternal  in  the  God- 
head." But  he  utterly  rejects  the  idea  that "  there  are 
three  separate  consciousnesses,  wills,"  in  the  persons 
of  the  Trinity.  He  admits  that  this  would  be  Trithe- 
ism.  He  is  offended  with  those  who  say,  that  there 
was  society,  counsel,  or  consultation  among  the  per- 
sons of  the  Trinity.  Yet  what  more  this  is — what 
more  distinct  consciousness  it  implies,  than  to  say, 
that  the  Father  sent  the  fSon  into  the  world,  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  perceive. 

But  the  question  is,  Is  it  possible  to  receive  what  is 
said  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  in  the  New  Testament 
without  conceiving  of  them  as  possessing  separate 
consciousness  and  will?  I  affirm,  without  any  sha- 
dow of  doubt,  that  it  is  not  possible.  The  Professor 
says,  that  the  language  is  to  be  received  with  qualifi- 
cation, and  he  compares  it  to  that  in  which  it  is  said, 

*  Schleiermacher's  tract  on  Sabellius,  translated  by  Prof.  Stuart, 
in  the  18th  and  19th  Nos,  of  the  Biblical  Repository  and  Quarterly 
Observer. 

t  See  Prof.  Stuart's  "  Remarks  "  on  Dr.  Schleiermacher's  Tract, 
in  the  Biblical  Repository  and  Quarterly  Observer,  No.  19. 

30 


350 

that  God  walks  upon  the  earth ;  that  he  ascends  and 
descends.  Are  the  cases  parallel  ?  In  the  one,  we 
easily  and  naturally  understand  the  representation  to 
be  figurative  ?  Is  the  other  of  the  same  nature  ?  Is 
it  figurative  language  ?  And  may  we  suppose  that 
the  reality  is  as  different  from  the  figure,  as  omnipre- 
sence is  different  from  ascending  and  descending.  Then 
we  may  all  believe  in  the  Trinity  !  Then  the  Trin- 
ity vanishes  away  into  nothing  ;  into  a  mere  figure  of 
speech.  When  we  read,  I  still  insist,  that  God  the 
Father  sent  his  Son  into  the  w^orld  ;  that  the  Son 
lived  on  earth  ;  that  he  prayed  to  God  the  Father ; 
that  he  ascribed  all  his  power  and  wisdom  to  God  ; 
in  short,  that  he  always  spoke  of  God,  his  Father,  as 
a  being  distinct  from  himself;  is  it  possible,  I  repeat, 
to  conceive  of  him  as  himself,  that  very  God  and  Fa- 
ther ?     And  I  re-aflirm  that  it  is  not  possible. 

The  history  of  opinions  shows  that  it  is  not  possible. 
The  early  fathers  of  the  Church,  either  did  not  hold 
to  the  equality  of  the  persons,  and  were  Arians  or 
quasi  Arians,  or  they  did  hold  to  the  equality,  and  were 
Tritheists.  The  modern  creeds  partake  much  of  the 
Tritheistic  character.  This,  the  Professor  mainly  ad- 
mits. This,  Schleiermacher  feels.  Hence  their  efforts 
to  relieve  the  subject  from  the  errors  of  ages.  Hence 
this  new  teaching  to  the  churches.  But  can  it  be  that 
a  cardinal,  essential,  saving  doctrine  of  Christianity 
has  been  left  to  be  cleared  up  by  dialectic  skill,  at  the 
end  of  eighteen  centuries  of  the  Christian  history? 
What  is  to  become  of  the  mass  of  men,  what  has  be- 
come of  them,  if  this  dialectic  skill  is  necessary  for  the 
true  understanding  of  the  true  doctrine  ? 

Our  own  position  on  this  subject,  we  may  add,  i.  e., 
our  position  as  reformers,  is  very  different.  We  are 
endeavouring,  it  is  true,  to  present  a  safe  and  sound 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     351 

doctrine.  But  we  do  not  say  that  any  view  of  Trinity 
or  Unity,  any  view  of  the  metaphysical  nature  of 
God,  is  necessary  to  salvation.  At  the  same  time,  we 
certainly  think  that  it  is  hetter  to  see  things  clearly, 
than  to  see  them  through  a  mist.  And  especially, 
when  we  find  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  re- 
presented as  essential  to  salvation,  we  see,  then,  that 
it  so  takes  hold  of  human  superstition  and  fear,  that  it 
so  enhsts  human  intolerance,  and  does  such  wrong 
and  mischief  in  every  way,  as  to  call  at  our  hands  for 
the  most  earnest  resistance.* 

The  further  leading  topics  in  theology  may  be  em- 
braced under  the  two  following  heads  :  human  nature 
and  its  redemption.  I  can  do  but  little  more  in  the 
space  that  remains  to  me,  than  to  point  out  the  true 
course  of  inquiry,  in  opposition  to  mere  hypothesis. 

Our  catechisms  taught  us  that  human  nature  is 
totally  depraved.  Here  was  hypothesis  working  upon 
its  most  delicate  and  susceptible  material,  the  mind 
of  childhood.  If  we  would  pursue  the  true  method  of 
inquiry,  we  must  forget  all  this,  and  take  up  the  sub- 
ject anew. 

Here  is  a  theory.  It  says  that  there  is  no  goodness 
in  human  nature.  Suppose  a  theory  to  assert  that 
there  is  no  faculty  of  reason  in  human  nature.  Should 
we  not  appeal  to  fact,  to  experience  ?  The  theory  says 
that  the  moral  quality  of  human  nature  is  one  of  un- 
mixed evil.     Indeed,  it  asserts  a  fact,  and  a  universal 

*  The  importance  attributed  to  this  doctrine  strikingly  appears 
in  what  Prof.  Stuart  says  of  Schleiermacher's  view  of  it.  After 
giving  an  affecting  account  of  his  death,  he  adds  :  "  Can  it  be  that 
a  man  who  lived  thus,  and  died  thus,  was  not  a  Christian  ?  1  feel 
constrained  to  say  that  I  mourn  his  loss  to  the  world,  as  an  efficient 
and  powerful  writer ;  but  I  cannot  mourn  as  one  without  hope  for 
him"  !  What  would  Prof.  Stuart  think  if  he  could  anticipate  such 
a  sentence  as  this,  written  concerning  himself  ? 


352        ERRORS  IN  THEOLOGY,  FROM 


and  unqualified  fact.  In  man  naturally,  in  the  mass 
of  men  unconverted,  there  is  nothing  truly  good.  An 
animal  amiableness  there  may  be,  but  there  is  nothing 
accordant  with  the  sacred  and  heaven -approving  law 
of  right. 

But  this  right — now  to  take  up  the  argument — this 
right,  I  say  ;  how  did  we  ever  come  to  know  that  there 
was  any  such  thing  at  all  ?  "  Our  conscience  taught 
us,"  it  will  be  said.  But  conscience  pronounces  upon 
something.  Upon  what  does  it  pronounce  ?  It  recog- 
nizes certain  facts ;  that  is  to  say,  certain  emotions, 
experiences.  But  what  facts,  what  experiences  1  Ex- 
periences of  right  and  wrong ;  of  right  as  well  as  wrong. 
In  short,  universal  conscience  sitting  in  judgment  on 
the  universal  experience,  pronounces  a  part  of  it  to  be 
right,  and  a  part  of  it  to  be  wrong.  We  feel  that  there 
are  right,  good,  blessed  things  in  our  common  hu- 
manity. All  our  conduct,  confidence,  love  towards 
one  another,  shows  it.  Flashings  of  indignation  to- 
wards cruelty  and  oppression,  tears  of  joy  over  holy 
human  pity  and  relief,  show  it.  All  human  literature, 
philosophy,  law,  government,  proclaim  the  same  con- 
viction. The  entire  mass  of  human  sentiment  and 
institution  stands  as  one  emphatic  contradiction  to  the 
dogma  of  total  depravity. 

But  it  is  said,  that  this  human  judgment  cannot  be 
relied  on,  that  it  is  false.  Then  every  thing  is  false. 
Then  the  very  power  on  which  we  rely  for  ascertain- 
ing the  truth  is  false.  Then,  too,  the  Bible  is  false. 
For  the  Bible  puts  itself  upon  the  verdict  of  the  uni- 
versal conscience.  That  conscience  declares  it  to  be 
right.  But  if  the  judgment  is  worthless,  that  claim  of 
the  book  falls.  If  the  eye  of  the  soul  sees  nothing 
truly,  if  the  light  in  us  be  darkness,  how  great  is  that 
darkness  ? 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     353 

But  does  not  the  book  itself,  contradicting  the  uni- 
versal conscience,  teach  the  doctrine  in  question  ?  It 
cannot,  I  think  we  may  say.  It  would  take  a  suicidal 
part  if  it  did.  It  would  destroy  its  own  foundations. 
It  does  not.  It  simply  speaks  as  we  all  speak,  who 
feel  that  the  world  is  full  of  evil.  Here  and  there  a 
strong  expression — of  a  wounded  conscience  saying, 
"I  was  shapen  in  iniquity" — of  outraged  holiness 
amidst  a  wicked  people,  saying,  "  They  have  all  gone 
out  of  the  way  ;  there  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not 
one," — this  is  the  whole  evidence.  One  text  may 
stand  against  it  all ;  recognizing  conscience  as  a  law, 
and  some  obedience  to  that  law,  as  things  actually 
existing  in  the  most  degraded  portions  of  mankind. 
"  For  when  the  Gentiles,-^'  says  Paul,  "  who  have  not 
the  law,  do  by  nature  the  things  contained  in  the  law, 
these  havinsT  not  the  law,  are  a  law  unto  themselves  ; 
which  show  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  their  hearts, 
their  conscience  also  bearing  witness ;  and  their 
thoughts  meanwhile  accusing  or  else  excusing  one 
another." 

Finally,  Redemption  from  sin — let  us  consider  it.  It 
is  a  comprehensive  work  ;  its  theatre,  the  world  ;  its 
sphere,  human  life ;  its  security,  God's  will  and  pur- 
pose ;  its  agents,  God's  power  and  Spirit ;  its  process, 
the  soul's  conversion  and  sanctification  ;  and  its  spe- 
cial means,  Christ's  life  and  sacrifice.  In  all  these  we 
devoutly  believe ;  and  we  are  only  anxious  that  nothing 
here  be  construed  unwisely  or  unreasonably ;  that 
nothing  be  inculcated  concerning  the  soul's  conver- 
sion, at  variance  with  the  soul's  nature  ;  nothing  con- 
cerning God's  purpose,  hostile  to  human  freedom ; 
nothing  concerning  the  atonement,  derogatory  to  the 
divine  wisdom  and  goodness.  It  is  in  vain  to  say  that 
reason  and  philosophy  have  nothing  to  do  with  these 
30* 


354  ERRORS    IN    THEOLOGY,    FROM 

matters.  They  have  something,  they  have  much  to 
do  with  them ;  they  are  at  the  very  bottom  of  that 
progress  which  orthodox  theology  in  various  quarters 
is  now  making.  There  is  indeed  much  opposition  still 
to  the  great  inductive  study  of  facts  and  principles ; 
but  the  opposition  is  giving  way,  and  it  will  continue 
to  yield  to  the  advances  of  a  rational  and  pure  Chris- 
tianity. 

It  is  not  till  now,  let  me  remark,  when  we  touch  the 
subject  of  Redemption,  that  we  have  reached  the  ground 
of  what  is  practical  in  religion.  The  questions  which 
we  have  thus  far  considered,  are  speculative,  though 
the  latter,  it  is  true,  has  important  moral  bearings. 
But  w^e  come  now  to  the  questions  that  touch  the 
essential  human  welfare :  what  has  been  done  for  it, 
and  what  is  to  be  done  ?  What  has  God  done,  and 
what  is  man  to  do  ? 

Let  us  attempt  here,  again,  to  draw  the  dividing 
line  between  fact  and  hypothesis.  What  is  fact  ?  A 
world  is  made ;  man  is  placed  upon  it ;  he  has  a 
moral  nature,  a  nature,  i.  e.  liable  to  err,  and  actually 
and  deeply  erring,  but  capable  of  recovery  and  im- 
provement ;  life  is  filled  with  ministrations  to  virtue, 
and  with  restraints  upon  evil :  and  with  our  belief, 
certain  Christian  facts  are  to  be  reckoned  in  the  ac- 
count ;  to  wit,  that  to  the  natural  means  of  virtue  and 
redemption,  certain  special  means  are  added,  the  teach- 
ing, the  example,  the  miracles,  and  the  sufferings  of 
Christ ;  and  moreover,  we  believe  that  a  divine  influ- 
ence is  imparted  to  help  human  endeavour.  That 
endeavour,  at  the  same  time,  is  to  be  put  forth  ;  it  is 
demanded  by  reason  and  Scripture  ;  it  is  implied  in 
this  demand  that  man  has  some  power  to  work  out 
his  welfare ;  and  it  is  a  matter  of  fact  that  he  has 
such  a  power. 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     356 

Now  to  explain  the  facts  of  the  human  condition 
and  redemption,  a  certain  hypothesis  is  introduced. 
And  let  it  be  repeated,  that  the  introduction  of  an  hy- 
pothesis is  not  to  be  condemned,  provided  it  be  well 
considered  that  it  is  a  mere  supposition.  If  it  is  rea- 
sonable ;  if  it  appears  best  to  explain  the  facts ;  if  it 
does  not  contradict  any  of  the  facts ;  it  may  be  proper- 
ly entertained  as  a  supposition  ;  it  may  justly  stand 
till  some  better  explanation  is  offered.  But  what  is 
the  hypothesis  on  which  the  prevailing  theology  is 
founded  ?  It  is  more  than  hypothesis,  to  be  sure,  with 
its  supporters.  It  is  unquestioned  assumption  ;  it  is 
an  mipregnable,  fixed  creed  ;  and  therein  I  hold  that 
it  is  unphilosophical.  But  it  is  really  nothing  else  but 
hypothesis  ;  it  is  not  certainty,  but  supposition  ;  it  can- 
not justly  claim  to  exclude  all  other  suppositions  ;  and 
now  what  is  it  ? 

It  is  that  man  was  created  in  a  state  of  absolute  in- 
nocence ;  that  he  fell  from  that  estate  ;  that  by  his  fall 
he  involved  his  whole  race  in  sin  and  misery ;  that  he 
stood  trial  for  all  his  posterity,  and  that  by  his  failure 
all  men  were  constituted  sinners  ;  that  they  have  lost 
the  power  of  recovery,  all  voluntary,  moral  power, 
to  be  good  and  pure  ;  that  the  earth  also  is  cursed  in 
consequence  of  Adam's  fall ;  that  its  elements,  its  pro- 
ducts, its  climate  perhaps,  at  any  rate  its  goodliness 
and  beauty  are  changed ;  that  the  glory  has  passed 
away  ;  in  short,  that  nature  without  and  nature  with- 
in us,  are  wrenched  from  their  original,  constitutional 
order,  and  are  not  what  God  originally  meant  or  made 
them  to  be.  The  world  now  rolls  round  the  sun,  a 
blasted,  ruined,  dark  sphere,  unlike  any  other  sphere 
in  its  condition  ;  it  has  lost  its  place  in  the  sisterhood 
of  happy  worlds  ;  and  could  any  creature's  eye  from 
above  look  down  upon  the  train  of  heavenly  orbs,  he 


356  ERRORS    IX    THi:OLOGY,    FROM 

would  see  this  to  be  marked,  marred,  and  desolate  ;  no 
smiling  orb,  no  embosoming  beauty  and  goodliness, 
but  scathed  and  blackened,  by  the  scourge  and  frown 
of  infinite  displeasure.  For  this  accursed  globe,  in  this 
awful  emergency,  the  hypothesis  proceeds  to  state,  that 
a  grand  expedient  was  found,  a  great  plan  of  redemp- 
tion was  devised.  It  was  devised  in  heaven.  Earth 
could  never  have  found  it  out.  Nor  angel  nor  archan- 
gel could  ever  have  seen  or  imagined  it.  There  was 
counsel  taken  in  heaven  for  the  salvation  of  the  world  ; 
for  the  recovery  of  man.  I  know  of  no  good  reason, 
I  repeat,  why  this  word,  counsel,  should  be  objected  to ; 
there  were  thoughts,  designs,  purposes  to  that  end. 
God,  the  Father,  determined  to  send  God,  the  Son, 
into  the  world.  In  due  time,  he  came  ;  the  Sent,  and 
not  the  Sender,  came  into  the  world ;  he  lived  among 
men,  for  thirty  years  and  more  ;  and  at  length,  he 
who  was  very  God  and  very  man,  died  upon  the  cross. 
By  thus  doing,  thus  suffering,  he  removed  an  other- 
wise insuperable  obstacle  to  the  bestowment  of  divine 
mercy  upon  sinful  men,  and  opened  the  way  for  their 
return  to  the  merciful  favour  of  God,  and  the  eternal 
bliss  of  heaven. 

What  an  hypothesis  !  With  no  irreverence,  but  in 
solemn  sincerity  I  declare,  that  I  have  felt,  while  un- 
folding it,  as  if  I  were  involved  in  the  shadows  of  some 
old,  terrific,  Hindu  or  Druid  mythology.  And  I  firmly 
believe,  that  if  this  hypothesis  had  been  this  day 
spread  before  any  audience  in  Christendom  for  the  first 
time,  if  they  had  never  heard  of  it  before,  they  would 
have  felt  it  as  I  do.  I  can  hardly  doubt  that  they 
would  have  risen  upon  their  feet  and  cried  out,  in 
amazement,  if  not  indignation,  at  a  theory  so  awful 
and  incredible. 

But  let  us  patiently  consider  it.     I  maintain  then, 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     357 

that  it  is  not  necessary  to  explain  the  facts ;  that  it  con- 
tradicts the  facts  ;  that  it  is  pure  assumption  without 
any  known  facts  to  rest  upon ;  and  that  it  is  essentially 
self-contradictory  and  altogether  incredible. 

Its  self-contradictory  character  in  one  point  I  have 
already  insisted  upon,  and  need  not  repeat  what  I  then 
said.  It  presents,  in  its  theory  of  the  divine  Persons 
who  took  their  distinct  and  respective  parts  in  the 
work  of  man's  redemption,  ideas  irreconcilably  at  va- 
riance with  the  Divine  Unity.  It  presents  further 
contradictions  ;  an  Almighty  will,  thwarted  ;  an  infi- 
nite counsel,  meeting  with  apparently  unforeseen  diffi- 
culties, and  obliged  to  resort  to  new  and  extraordinary 
expedients.  Man  was  made  pure,  and  he  fell.  How, 
I  7night  ask,  could  purity  sin  ?  It  is  held  to  be  morally 
impossible,  impossible  without  divine  intervention,  for 
total  depravity  to  put  forth  one  right  affection.  How 
then  could  perfect  purity  sin  ?  Did  God  interfere  to 
make  it  sin  ?  But  to  proceed  with  the  supposition  ;  if 
man,  instead  of  being  made  capable  alike  of  good  and 
evil,  was  made  constitutionally  sinless,  what  could 
have  been  the  end  but  to  keep  him  so  ?  But  the  fall 
defeated  that  end.  Then,  again,  the  constitution  of 
the  material  world  Avas  originally  established  for  a 
pure  race  ;  it  was  changed  to  meet  the  condition  of  a 
guilty  race.  If  it  had  been  foreseen  that  the  very  first 
man  would  sin,  and  drag  down  all  his  offspring  with 
him,  why  was  the  Vv^orld  made  for  innocence  to  dwell 
in  ?  It  would  be  as  if  in  pleasant  grounds,  a  fair  gar- 
den had  been  made  for  an  animal  supposed  to  be  hanii- 
less,  and  then,  the  animal  proving  to  be  a  tiger,  it  had 
been  necessary  to  raze  the  grounds,  to  tear  up  the 
shrubs  and  the  flowers,  and  to  turn  the  garden  into  a 
prison  and  a  lair. 

Again  ;    I  say,  that  the  theory  is  pure  assumption, 


358         ERORS  IN  THEOLOGY,  FROM 

without  any  known  facts  to  rely  upon.  That  the  con- 
stitution of  nature  was  changed,  that  the  physical 
nature  of  man,  his  natural  appetites  and  passions, 
were  changed,  is  what  we  do  not  know,  and  is  in  fact 
a  thing  incredible.  That  the  moral  nature  of  man, 
imperfect  by  the  very  limitation  of  his  powers,  ignorant 
before  experience,  placed  here  apparently  to  learn  by 
experience,  liable  to  err  by  every  known  and  conceiv- 
able element  of  his  constitution  ;  that  this  nature  at 
its  origin  was  in  a  state  of  angelic  purity,  and  then  fell 
at  once  into  utter  depravity,  is  what  we  do  not  know, 
and  is,  in  truth,  a  thing  unintelligible.  Does  any  one 
really  suppose,  can  he  reall}^  believe,  that  the  world, 
when  man  was  created  and  placed  upon  it,  was  essen- 
tially otherwise  than  it  is  now ;  that  it  was  not 
moulded  of  hills  and  valleys,  and  covered  with  herbs 
and  flowers,  and  visited  by  heat  and  cold,  storm  and 
sunshine  ;  or  that  man  Avas  not  clothed  with  flesh 
and  fleshly  appetites  ;  or  that  his  soul  was  not  at  the 
beginning,  weak,  inexperienced,  and  liable  to  err  ?  But 
it  may  be  said  that  there  is  another  class  of  facts  to  be 
considered  ;  the  declarations  of  the  Bible.  We  receive 
those  declarations.  What  are  they  ?  That  man  fell ; 
that  the  earth  was  cursed  in  consequence ;  and  that 
through  sin,  misery  has  come  into  the  world.  Can  these 
declarations  be  stretched  out  to  cover  the  stupendous 
hypothesis  which  has  been  stated  ?  I  hold  that  there 
is  another  hypothesis  that  meets  and  satisfies  them. 
Suppose  that  man's  first  estate  was  one  of  compara- 
tive simplicity  and  purity,  and  this  the  more  likely  be- 
cause he  must  have  been  created  in  an  adult  state  ; 
suppose  that  after  a  time  he  fell  into  gross  wicked- 
ness and  disorder  ;  suppose  that  industry  and  culture 
declined,  and  the  earth  shot  up  briars  and  thorns, 
where  it  before  gave  herbs  and  fruits  ;  and  suppose,  in 


FALSE    PRINCIPLES    OF    REASONING.  359 

fine,  that  sin  thus  coming  into  the  world,  was  a  curse 
to  the  earth  and  a  fountain  of  misery  through  all  its 
ages  ;  and  does  not  this  hypothesis  answer  to  all  the 
declarations  of  the  Bible  7  To  my  mind,  it  does  so  in 
the  most  satisfactory  manner, 

I  may  add  that  the  hypothesis  which  we  are  consid- 
ering, is  peculiarly  the  theologian's  hypothesis.  It  is 
not,  and  never  has  been,  the  theory  of  philosophy.  In 
all  the  general  works  that  have  been  written  on  man 
and  the  constitution  of  man,  on  the  philosophy  of  his- 
tory and  of  the  human  condition,  on  the  philosophy  of 
mind  and  morals,  it  has  always  been  maintained  that 
man  and  life,  the  world  and  the  human  constitution 
and  condition,  are  such  as  God  wisely  made  and  in- 
tended them  to  be,  for  the  general  progress  and  improve- 
ment of  the  human  race.  In  this  respect,  the  prevail- 
ing theology  stands  directly  confronted  and  at  open 
war  with  philosophy.  And  hence  it  is  that  philosophy 
has  been,  to  so  considerable  an  extent,  infidel ;  con- 
ceiving, as  it  naturally  has  done,  that  the  prevailing 
theology  was  the  true  Bible  philosophy.  Hence  a 
remarkable  French  writer*  has  Lately  gone  to  the  in- 
sane length  of  maintaining  that  the  true  philosophical 
tendency  of  thought  is  to  the  utter  subversion  of  all 
religion,  and  in  fact  to  absolute,  blank,  desolating 
atheism.  Is  it  not  time  to  consider  where  the  theolo- 
gical hypothesis  is  leading  ? 

But  to  proceed  :  I  maintain,  in  the  third  place,  that 
that  hypothesis  contradicts  the  facts  which  it  proposes 
to  explain.  It  contradicts  the  fact  of  natural  goodness 
in  man.  And  it  contradicts  the  fact  of  moral  freedom. 
These  denials,  we  may  observe,  are  closely  bound  to- 
gether, and  mutually  dependent  on  each  other.  If 
man  is  totally  depraved,  he  can  have  no  freedom  to  be 
*  Auguste  Comte. 


360 

good.  If  he  has  no  freedom  to  be  good  he  is  indeed 
totally  and  hopelessly  depraved. 

The  leading  tendency  if  not  object,  of  the  cele- 
brated work  of  .Jonathan  Edwards  on  the  Will,  is  to 
prove  that  man,  in  his  natural  state,  has  no  power,  no 
liberty  to  be  good.  Now,  on  the  ground  that  man  is 
totally  depraved  his  position  is  impregnable ;  his  ar- 
gument is  triumphant.  And  the  reason  is  this  :  good- 
ness, strictly  speaking,  is  not  an  object  of  will.  It  is 
not  within  the  province  of  the  will.  I  can  no  more 
will  virtue  to  be  lovely  to  me  ;  that  is,  I  can  no  more 
will  to  love  it ;  than  I  can  will  honey  to  be  sweet,  or 
sweetness  to  be  agreeable  to  my  taste,  and  to  love  it. 
If  there  is  not  a  love  of  virtue,  as  of  sweetness,  in  the 
very  constitution  of  my  nature,  I  have  no  power  to 
love  it.  What,  then,  is  the  province  of  the  will  ?  It 
is  distinctly  this  :  to  direct  certain  actions  of  my  body, 
and  the  attention  of  my  mind.  The  latter  is  the  only 
point  for  consideration  here ;  for  we  are  not  speaking 
of  the  visible  action  of  virtue,  which  is  only  the  image 
of  inward  virtue.  What,  then,  can  I  do  to  awaken  in 
myself  good  and  virtuous  emotion,  to  awaken  love  ? 
I  cannot  will  them  into  existence  any  more  than  I  can 
will  the  love  of  music  or  of  nature  into  existence.  But 
this  I  can  do ;  this  is  within  the  province  of  the  will. 
I  can  will  and  give  attention  to  them.  I  can  think 
of  the  objects  that  should  awaken  good  emotions.  I 
can  meditate  and  pray.  Thus,  if  I  have  some  natural 
good  emotions,  and  the  ability  to  cultivate  them,  I 
have  the  power  to  be  good  ;  and  no  otherwise.  I  have 
both. 

But  this  the  hypothesis  denies.  It  denies  that  we 
have  naturally  any  right  feelings.  And  it  ought,  in 
consequence,  to  deny,  and  it  does  usually  deny  that 
we  have  any  power  whatever  to  bring  them  into  exist- 


FILSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     361 

ence.  And  in  so  doing,  I  say,  it  contradicts  the  foun- 
dation facts  of  our  nature ;  facts  on  which  all  religion 
and  morality  repose ;  facts  without  which  the  Bible  is 
an  enigma,  and  without  which  I  humbly  and  reve- 
rently say,  that,  to  my  apprehension,  the  government 
of  heaven  would  be  the  most  awful  and  terrific  injustice. 
For  the  hypothesis  involves  to  my  mind,  this  farther, 
astounding,  paralyzing  contradiction ;  that  we  are 
commanded,  on  pain  of  hell,  on  pain  of  God's  displea- 
sure, on  pain  of  unending  guilt  and  misery,  to  do  that 
which  we  have  no  power  to  do  ;  to  feel  that  which 
we  have  no  power  to  feel ;  to  achieve  that  which  we 
have  no  power  to  achieve. 

Nor,  in  fine,  is  this  hypothesis  necessary  to  explain 
the  facts  of  our  nature  and  condition.  It  is  imagined 
that  the  fact  of  sin  implies  some  tremendous  catas- 
trophe hke  the  fall ;  that  the  origin  of  evil  is  embo- 
somed, a  dark  secret,  in  some  cloud  of  mystery  or 
wrath  ;  that  the  miseries  of  the  world  prove  it  to  have 
been  wrenched  away  from  the  fair  universe  of  God. 
But  the  assumption,  I  conceive,  is  altogether  gratuit- 
ous and  uncalled-for.  It  is  in  the  very  nature  of  a 
moral  and  imperfect  being  to  err  ;  not  to  sin  wilfully, 
malignantly ;  that  is  not  necessary  ;  but  to  err,  through 
ignorance  and  impulse,  to  fall  into  excess  or  defect, 
and  so  to  fall  into  sin.  And  it  is  in  the  power  of 
such  a  being  to  sin  intentionally.  Man  has  done 
both.  And  misery  has  followed  as  the  consequence  at 
once,  and  corrective  of  his  errors.  Where,  now,  is  the 
mystery  or  difficulty  ?  Where  is  the  need  of  any  ex- 
traordinary hypothesis,  implying  the  subversion  or 
change  of  the  original  plan,  or  the  devising  of  expedi- 
ents to  meet  an  unnatural  or  unforeseen  crisis  ?  I 
will  venture  to  say,  in  dissent  from  the  common  opin- 
ion, and  at  the  risk  of  being  thought  not  to  under- 
31 


362        ERRORS  IN  THEOLOGY,  FROM 

stand  the  difficulties  of  the  case,  that  "  the  origin  of 
evil"  presents  no  dark  or  mysterious  problem.  To  my 
mind,  it  is  clear  and  of  easy  solution.  That  is  to  say, 
it  is  clear  as  to  the  principle ;  tliough  there  are  diffi- 
culties as  to  the  details.  And  the  solution,  as  I  have 
already  implied,  is  this.  An  imperfect,  free,  moral  na- 
ture is,  in  its  essential  constitution — is,  by  definition, 
peccable  ;  it  is  liable  to  err  ;  and  its  erring  is  nothing 
strange  nor  mysterious.  The  notion  of  untempted  in- 
nocence for  such  a  being,  is,  I  hold,  a  dream  of  Theo- 
logy. His  very  improvement,  his  very  progress,  ever 
implies  previous  erring.  And  that  from  his  erring, 
misery  should  come  ;  this  is  equally  intelligible.  Now 
the  extent  to  which  these  evils  go,  not  the  origin  of 
them  ;  this  is  doubtless  a  problem  that  I  cannot  solve. 
There  are  shadows  upon  the  world  that  we  cannot 
penetrate  ;  masses  of  sin  and  misery  that  overwhelm 
us  with  wonder  and  awe ;  but  the  world-problem  it- 
self is  not  involved  in  those  shadows.  The  principle 
of  the  case  is  clear,  and  needs  not  the  theological  hy- 
pothesis to  relieve  it  from  difficulty ;  not  to  say  that 
the  relief  were  stranger  and  harder  to  receive  than  the 
difficulty. 

The  Redemption  of  man,  then,  as  I  understand  it, 
proceeds  on  this  ground  and  in  this  wise.  Man  is 
placed  upon  the  earth,  with  a  nature,  moral,  improve- 
able,  immortal ;  capable  of  good,  exposed  to  evil ;  in 
temptation  and  suffering,  in  need  and  peril ;  and  all 
this  mingled  too  with  joy  and  hope.  His  being  is  a 
good  gift ;  his  life  is  a  good  opportunity.  It  is  the 
highest  gift  and  glory  in  the  universe,  to  be  capable  of 
virtue,  of  purity,  of  the  blessed  love  and  likeness  of 
God.  A  field  for  such  attainment,  is  spread  here  upon 
earth ;  a  school  is  opened,  filled  with  incessant,  instant, 
sublime  instructions.     But  the  school  is  not  for  the  idle. 


FALSE  PRINCIPLES  OF  REASONING.     363 

The  field  is  not  the  field  of  the  sluggard.  Through 
toil  and  struggle,  through  disaster  and  sorrow,  with 
blessed  affections  too,  and  hopes  and  foretastes  of 
heaven,  man  must  rise. 

Now  the  doctrine  of  Redemption  of  which  this  is  the 
basis — the  doctrine  of  Redemption  is,  that  God,  our 
Maker,  hath  had  compassion  upon  us  and  hath  inter- 
posed for  our  welfare ;  that  he,  the  Infinite  One,  whose 
presence  is  in  every  world  and  with  every  creature, 
hath  manifested  that  presence  in  miracles,  and  in 
mercies  ;  in  miracles  divine,  in  mercies  unspeakable. 
What  creed  can  be  more  to  me  than  this ;  that  God 
pities  me ;  that  God  careth  for  me  ;  and  that  to  me,  a 
wanderer  from  his  presence  and  love,  he  hath  sent 
forth  his  Son,  "  to  bring  me  nigh  to  him  ! "  Nigh  to 
Him  !  shelter,  protection,  peace,  joy,  blessedness  ;  all, 
and  more  than  all  that  words  can  utter,  is  summed  up 
in  this.  The  bright  realm  of  heaven  that  overwhelmed 
me  with  its  awful  majesty,  melts  and  dissolves  in 
dews  of  mercy  upon  my  thirsting  and  fainting  nature. 

Redemption — this  is  the  grandeur  of  the  world.  All 
the  majesty  of  earthly  empires  sinks  to  nothing  before 
this  kingdom  of  God,  this  reign  of  heaven  upon  earth ! 
Oh  !  to  what  noble  end,  serve  all  our  cares  and  labours 
and  studies  but  to  build  up  this  kingdom  ;  to  build  it 
up  in  our  hearts  and  homes  ;  to  build  it  up  in  the  city 
and  the  wilderness  ;  to  build  it  up  in  all  lands,  and 
among  all  nations  ?  To  what  other  end  Avere  appoint- 
ed all  our  bitter  sorrows  ?  What  means  all  the  weary- 
ing and  wearing  conflict  of  human  affairs  and  interests  ; 
with  sickness  and  pain  and  grief  and  death  to  teach 
us — what  means  it  but  this ;  that  out  of  the  infinite 
strife  and  eternal  vicissitude,  should  rise  immortal  vir- 
tue and  purity  ? 


364  ERRORS    IN    THEOLOGY,    ETC. 

To  see  redeemed  men  walking  upon  earth ;  the 
chains  fallen,  the  step  free,  the  brow  lifted  to  heaven : 
to  see  redeemed  men,  changed  into  the  image  of  God, 
touched  by  his  spirit,  won  by  the  loveliness  of  Christ — 
won  to  love  and  patience  and  self-sacrifice — this  is  a 
vision  compared  with  which  all  other  visions  fade 
away. 

It  is  coming !  it  shall  come !  It  hath  been,  and 
shall  be  yet  more.  Yes  ;  the  world  shall  yet  more 
bear  the  impress  of  this  glorious  work  !  "  An  high- 
way shall  there  be  upon  it,  and  a  way  ;  and  it  shall 
be  called,  a  way  of  holiness  ;  the  unclean  shall  not 
pass  over  it ;  but  it  shall  be  for  those  ;  the  way-faring 
men,  though  fools,  shall  not  err  therein.  No  lion  shall 
be  there,  nor  any  ravenous  beast  shall  go  up  thereon  ; 
it  shall  not  be  found  there  ;  but  the  redeemed  shall 
walk  there.  And  the  ransomed  of  the  Lord  shall  re- 
turn and  come  to  Zion,  with  songs  and  everlasting  joy 
upon  their  heads  ;  they  shall  obtain  joy  and  gladness ; 
and  sorrow  and  sighing  shall  flee  away." 


ON   THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS   OF 
MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.* 


This  is  the  very  book  which  we  have  long  wished 
to  see.  For  we  have  long  been  convinced  that  there 
is  a  question  connected  with  the  Calvinistic  contro- 
versy, more  important  than  all  others,  going  beyond 
all  others,  and  that  is  nothing  less  than  a  question 
about  the  essential  principles  and  grounds  of  right  and 
wrong.  What  i^  rectitude  .^  And  how  are  we  to  arrive 
at  the  knowledge  of  it  ?  These  are  the  questions,  which 
Dr.  Wardlaw  has  undertaken  to  discuss  in  the  work 
before  us.  And  what  now,  do  our  readers  suppose,  is 
the  legitimate  theory  of  Calvinism  on  the  subject  of 
morals  ?  Wh)^,  truly,  that  human  nature,  Avhich  has 
always  been  supposed  to  be  both  the  subject  of  moral 
philosophy  and  its  investigator,  is  neither  one  nor  the 
other;  that  it  neither  furnishes  the  facts  on  Avhich  a 
just  theory  of  morals  can  be  built  up,  nor  contains  the 
poiver  that  is  able  to  discriminate  among  any  facts,  so 
as  to  arrive  at  a  safe  conclusion.  Human  nature  is 
totally  depraved  ;  therefore  it  furnishes  no  data  for  a 
moral  theory.  Its  very  conscience  is  perverted;  the 
very  labours  of  conscience  in  its  own  appropriate  sphere, 
that  of  moral  philosophy,  have  resulted  in  error  ;  and 
in  such  serious,  wide-spread,  imiversal  error,  that  it 
cannot  be  trusted,   as  a  principle  to  decide  between 

*  Review  of  "  Christian  Ethics,  or  Moral  Philosophy  on  the  Prin- 
ciple of  Divine  Revelation.  By  Ralph  Wardlaw,  D.D.  With  an 
Introductory  Essay,  by  Leonard  Woods,  D.D." 

31* 


366  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

right  and  wrong.  "  It  is  preposterous,"  says  Dr.  Ward- 
law,  "  to  commit  the  decision  of  an  inquiry  respecting 
the  true  principles  of  moral  rectitude,  to  a  creature 
subject  to  all  the  blinding  and  perverting  influences  of 
moral  pravity." 

Such  is,  substantially,  Dr.  Wardlaw's  theory,  though 
his  adherence  to  it  is  not  quite  so  unflinching  as  we 
had  expected  to  find  it.  He  admits  that  there  is  some 
dim  light  of  conscience  left  in  human  nature.  But  that 
light  is  put  out  by  a  single  consideration,  to  which  we 
beg  our  readers  to  attend  with  us  for  one  moment. 
The  Calvinistic  doctrine,  be  it  remembered,  is,  that 
mankind  are  totally  depraved,  that  human  nature,  in 
its  ordinary  state  and  in  the  mass  of  mankind,  is  not 
a  mixture  of  good  and  evil,  but  that  it  is  unmixed  evil ; 
that  there  is  nothing-  truly  good  in  it.  Now  it  is 
notorious,  that  men  in  all  ages  and  among  all  nations, 
have  been  accustomed  to  make,  what  they  have  called, 
moral  discriminations  ;  to  pronounce  some  things  bad, 
and  other  things  good,  in  the  character  of  their  fellow 
beings.  But  this  judgment,  according  to  the  Calvin- 
istic theory,  has  been  a  total  mistake.  Conscience  has 
been  as  much  depraved  as  any  other  part  of  human 
nature.  It  has  been  worse  than  an  unsafe  or  defective 
guide ;  it  has  been  the  grand  arch-deceiver  of  the 
world  ;  leading  mankind  in  all  ages  to  suppose  there 
was  good,  v/here  there  really  was  no  good  whatsoever. 

It  will  be  perceived  that  we  use  the  word  conscience 
here  for  the  faculty  of  moral  discrimination  in  general, 
though  that  word  is  usually  restricted  in  its  application, 
so  as  to  designate  only  the  judgments,  we  pronounce 
upon  ourselves.  The  power,  however,  which  morally 
discriminates  good  from  evil,  must  be  essentially  the 
same,  whether  it  is  applied  to  ourselves  or  others.  But 
now,  we  repeat,  according  to  the  Calvinistic  theory, 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  367 

this  moral  discrimination  is  utterly  at  fault ;  it  is 
entitled  to  no  confidence  whatever.  Its  judgment  about 
right  and  wrong  is  a  mere  pretence,  a  mere  farce.  Its 
very  use  of  terms,  its  very  nomenclature,  has  been  a 
succession  of  blunders  from  the  creation  of  the  world 
to  this  day.  There  is  really  no  such  thing  as  right 
and  wrong  among  the  mass  of  mankind.  All  is  wrong, 
and  nothing  but  wrong.  The  moral,  the  religious 
complexion  of  human  nature  is  nothing  but  black ; 
and  the  eye,  that  has  fancied  it  saw  white  spots  and 
various  intermingled  hues,  has  been  totally  deceived. 
And  after  ten  thousands  and  millions  of  such  mistakes, 
that  eye,  the  moral  eye  in  man,  is  not  to  be  trusted 
at  all. 

Now  moral  philosophy,  in  utter  disregard  of  these 
remonstrances  of  Calvinism,  has  built  up  its  theories 
on  the  basis  of  human  nature.  It  has  taken,  analyzed, 
and  classified  the  facts  of  human  nature, — that  is  to 
say,  human  feelings,  passions,  desires ;  it  has  pro- 
nounced some  things  in  human  nature  to  be  right ;  it 
has  held  itself  competent  to  decide  which  are  right  and 
which  are  wrong,  and  thus  to  establish  principles  of 
duty,  to  show  that  some  things  ought  to  be  done,  and 
others  avoided.  But  here  Calvinism  and  moral  phi- 
losophy are  at  issue.  And  it  is  the  object  of  the  first 
part  of  Dr.  Wardlaw's  work  to  plead  the  cause  of 
Calvinism  against  all  the  systems  of  moral  philosophy 
in  the  world.  He  passes  them  in  review,  the  systems 
of  Aristotle,  of  Zeno,  and  of  Epicurus,  and  the  modern 
ones  of  Cudworth,  Adam  Smith,  Dr.  Hutcheson,  Dr. 
Brown,  Hume,  and  Bishop  Butler ;  and,  because  they 
have  not  recognized  the  Calvinistic  view  of  human 
depravity,  he  pronounces  them  essentially  defective 
and  wrong 

It  is  not  our  intention  to  follow  Dr.  Wardlaw  thiough 


368  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

the  several  parts  of  his  work.  We  are  at  too  great  a 
distance  from  him,  to  make  it  a  question  of  much 
interest  here,  whether  or  not  he  has  done  himself  credit 
as  a  philosopher  or  as  a  reasoner.  Our  chief  business 
is  with  the  main  question,  Whether  the  doctrine  of 
total  depravity  is  to  overthrow  all  our  moral  theories, 
and  to  unsettle  the  very  grounds  of  moral  truth.  But 
we  cannot  help  observing,  that  Dr.  Wardlaw  seems  to 
us  to  have  been  neither  steady  to  his  main  point,  nor 
just  to  the  systems  he  attacks,  nor  very  discriminating 
with  regard  to  those  claims  of  the  Bible  which  lie 
undertakes  to  set  up.  If  human  nature  be  totally 
depraved,  then,  indeed,  the  moral  theories  are  all 
wrong,  totally  wrong.  This  main  point  and  the  maiji 
inference,  the  writer  should  have  steadfastly  adhered 
to,  or,  as  it  seems  to  us,  he  should  not  have  written 
this  book.  That  is  to  say,  he  should  not  have  written 
a  book  of  such  violent  and  wholesale  attack  upon  all 
former  moral  writers ;  because  the  moment  he  quits 
the  positions  above  stated,  he  steps  upon  the  very 
ground,  which  these  writers  themselves  occupy.  In 
consistency,  there  should  be  none  of  these  qualifying 
phrases,  "  in  a  measure,"  "  to  a  certain  degree,"  so  freely 
scattered  up  and  down  in  this  book,  none  of  these  loop- 
holes of  escape  from  the  theory,  none  of  these  old 
Calvinistic  practices  of  asserting  much  in  the  body  of 
the  discourse  and  denying  it  in  the  "  improvement ;" 
since  these  qualifications,  or  any  qualifications,  in- 
stantly carry  the  Calvinistic  philosopher  upon  the  very 
ground  which  he  opposes  and  contemns.  For  all  moral 
philosophers  have  admitted  that  there  is  mucli  wrong 
and  evil  in  human  nature,  and  much  liability  to  error 
in  the  human  conscience  ;  else  why  should  they  labour 
to  set  up  a  true  and  right  standard  ?  And  herein  it  is, 
that  we  think  Dr.  Wardlaw  has  not  been  just  to  them. 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  369 


He  treats  them  as  if  he  supposed  they  had  taken  the 
whole  of  human  nature  m  its  present  condition,  as  their 
standard;  than  which  nothing  can  be  more  untrue. 
As  an  iUustration  of  his  meaning,  he  supposes  a  chem- 
ist to  take  and  analyze  a  portion  of  polluted  Thame^ 
water,  and  to  present  us  the  resuU,  as  an  account  of 
the  pure  element.     But  see  how  unfair  this  is,  and  how 
fatal  too,  to  the  Doctor's  theory.     The  polluted  stream, 
of  course,  is  human  nature.     But  does  the  moral  chem- 
ist present  the  whole  of  his  analysis,  as  an  account  of 
moral  purity?     Does  he  incorporate  all  the  vileness  of 
the  human  affections  into  his  theory  of  moral  rectitude  / 
Nothing  can  be  farther  from  the  truth.     But,  moreover 
cannot  the  chemist  find  pure  water  in  the  most  tainted 
stream  ?     When  he  has  analyzed  a  portion  taken  from 
the  "sluggish  river,"  into  its  component  parts,  can  he 
not  present  to  us  pure  water,  and  tell  us  what  it  is  ? 
This  is  what  the  moral  examiner  has  done.     With 
regard  to  the  use  of  the  Scriptures,  in  the  formation  of 
a  iust  moral  philosophy,  nothing   would  dehght  us 
more,  than  to  see  them  fairly  and  understandmgly 
applied  to  that  purpose.     That  they  have  been  too 
much  neglected  by  philosophers  is  certain.     That  they 
will  contribute  more  than  they  have  done,  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  more  and  more  correct  moral  theories,  we 
have  no  doubt,  and  we  are  glad  to  have  the  pubhc 
attention  directed  to  this  point.     But  to  assert  that  the 
Scriptures  are  the  source  of  our  original  moral  concep- 
tions, or  of  all  our  moral  conceptions,  is  attempting  to 
do  them  honour,  as  we  hope  to  show,  not  only  m 
defiance  of  reason,  but  in  disregard  of  their  own  im- 
plied  and  obvious  character. 

After  all,  we  cannot  help  asking,  what  truth,  what 
one  truth  has  Dr.  Wardlaw  added  to  the  theory  of 
morals  ?    What  one  discovery  has  he  made  in  this  new 


370  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

field  of  inquiry  ?  Not  one.  The  world  has  heard  of 
no  new  discovery.  This  single  fact  shows  how  base- 
less are  the  assumptions,  and  how  groundless  are  the 
sweeping  complaints  against  moral  philosophy,  with 
which  this  book  sets  out. 

But  let  us  proceed  to  some  consideration  of  the  Cal- 
vinistic  theory  of  moral  philosophy,  or,  more  exactly 
perhaps,  the  Calvinistic  rejection  of  all  former  theories. 

And,  in  the  first  place,  let  us  consider,  a  little  more 
fully,  the  ground  which  Calvinism  occupies.  Its  posi- 
tion with  regard  to  moral  philosophy.  Dr.  Wardlaw 
has  stated.  It  is  not,  however,  with  philosophy  alone, 
that  Calvinism  is  at  war,  but  with  all  literature,  with 
all  the  histories  in  the  world,  with  almost  all  the  me- 
moirs that  ever  were  written,  and*  not  less,  with  the 
common  sense,  common  conversation,  and  common 
conduct  of  all  mankind.  For  what  is  the  tenor  of 
all  the  literature,  the  poetry,  the  fiction,  the  history,  the 
biography  in  the  world  J  What  are  the  written,  the 
recorded  thoughts  of  mankind,  as  they  bear  upon  the 
point  before  us  ?  What  is  all  this — that  is  portrayed 
by  the  hands  of  unregenerate  men,  and  that  draws  its 
delineations  from  the  characters  of  unregenerate  men  ? 
Look  into  these  works,  and  you  find  them  filled  with 
moral  pictures,  pictures  of  good  and  evil.  Here,  indig- 
nation at  vice  flashes  across  the  page  of  genius  ;  there, 
the  pencil,  dipped  in  the  dyes  of  heaven,  portrays  the 
glowing  form  of  moral  beauty  and  commends  it  to  the 
admiration  of  the  world.     Here, 

"  the  historic  muse, 
Proud  of  her  treasure,  marches  down  with  it 
To  latest  time  ;" 

and  there,  satire  throws  its  withering  glance  upon 
fraud  and  meanness.  Here,  the  orator  thunders  out 
his  anathema  against  the  tyrant  and  oppressor ;    and 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  371 

there,  friendship  raises  its  monument  to  departed  good- 
ness, pours  out  its  tears  in  eulogy  and  song,  and  be- 
queaths unequalled  virtue  to  undying  remembrance. 
"  Such  beneficence,"  is  its  language,  "  such  beneficence, 
such  excellence,  such  loveliness, — when  shall  we  look 
upon  their  like  again  ?"  Well,  it  is  all  a  mistake  ! — 
concerning  the  mass  of  mankind,  it  is  all  a  mistake  ! 
There  is  no  ground  in  human  nature  for  these  moral 
discriminations.  All  is  wrong,  all  is  evil ;  and  what 
is  called  good  is  only  the  semblance  of  good.  So  ends 
the  Calvinist's  catechism.  The  same  is  true  of  the 
conversation  and  conduct  of  men.  Their  conduct, 
much  of  it,  expresses  confidence  and  love  to  one  an- 
other. The  manners  of  life  all  over  the  world,  with 
however  much  of  coldness  and  distrust,  are  neverthe- 
less moulded  by  these  sentiments  of  the  heart ;  the 
approving  smile,  the  glowing  countenance,  the  out- 
stretched hand,  the  fond  embrace,  are  testifying  all 
over  the  world,  that  there  are  qualities  to  be  admired, 
that  there  are  virtues  to  be  loved.  Conversation,  too, 
is  continually  bearing  witness  to  the  same  convictions. 
Men  are  everywhere  speaking  of  one  and  another  whom 
they  know,  as  good,  as  excellent,  as  acting  worthily 
and  nobly.  They  are  addressing  to  one  another,  in  a 
thousand  indirect  forms  of  language,  the  same  fervent 
and  kind  sentiments.  Conversation,  language,  is 
everywhere  spreading,  in  the  breath  of  speech,  its  invis- 
ible network,  and  weaving  the  ties  of  affection  that 
hold  society  together.  And  the  very  foundation  of  all 
this  is  confidence  in  human  worth.  But  again  we 
say,  that  Calvinism  holds  all  this  to  be  an  entire  mis- 
take. And  there  is  nothing  on  earth  that  is  allowed 
to  stand  against  this  blighting  judgment.  You  are 
surrounded,  perhaps,  with  children.  Their  early  affec- 
tions, hke  their  bright  faces,  are  putting  on  a  thousand 


372  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

quick,  and  fluctuating,  and  beautiful  expressions.  You 
are  charmed  and  won  by  their  infantile  simplicity  and 
exquisite  tenderness.  Their  very  voices  seem  to  be 
softened  and  attuned  by  the  gentleness  of  their  hearts. 
"  Beautiful  ones  of  earth  !"  you  are  ready  to  exclaim, 
"  almost  meet  for  heaven  !"  And  the  Saviour's  voice 
answers  back,  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven  !" 
It  is  all  a  mistake  !  says  the  system  we  are  consider- 
ing. In  these  children  there  is  nothing  really  good  ; 
in  the  sight  of  the  unerring  Judge  of  right  and  wrong, 
nothing  good  !  Your  imagination  may  please  itself 
with  fancying  that  these  are  little  cherubs  :  but  the 
truth  is — pardon  the  phrase  for  the  sake  of  the  truth — 
the  truth  is,  that  they  are  only  little  devils  in  the  guise 
of  cherubs !  Because,  if  there  were  one  particle  of 
real  holiness  in  these  beings,  if  the  only  unerring  eye 
saw  anything  really  good  in  them,  then  they  would  be 
something  better  than  totally  depraved ;  they  would 
be  Christians,  says  this  system, — so  say  not  we, — they 
would  be  Christians,  and  in  the  way  to  heaven ;  but 
there  is  not  in  them  one  particle  of  real  excellence ! 

But  we  must  stop  here,  one  moment,  to  consider  and 
to  answer  for  the  thousandth  time,  we  suppose,  the  only 
objection  that  is  ever  offered  to  this  conclusion.  "Not 
one  particle  of  holiness,"  the  defender  of  this  system 
may  say ;  "  but  still  there  is  much  that  is  amiable  and 
excellent,  in  human  nature ;  and  much  that  is  so 
pleasing,  that  it  almost  persuades  us  to  call  it  real  vir- 
tue." If  we  were  dealing  with  a  professed  metaphysi- 
cian or  moral  philosopher,  Ave  confess  that  we  should 
hardly  know  how  to  suppress  our  indignation  at  such 
trifling  with  words,  as  appears  in  this  objection. 
What  is  it,  that  is  in  controversy  here  ?  It  is  moral 
excellence.  The  question  is  about  moral  excellence, 
and  about  nothing  else.     It  is  not  about  what  may 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  373 

chance  to  be  pleasing  and  agreeable  to  a  totally  de- 
praved nature,  but  about  what  is  really  good, — good 
according  to  the  only  unerring  standard.  But  what 
is  the  highest  and  most  unerring  standard  ?  It  is  the 
judgment  of  God.  Is  there  any  thing  morally  good  in 
human  nature,  according  to  that  standard?  The 
Calvinist's  answer  is,  Nothing.  Here  end  all  questions 
then.  To  say  that  there  is  something  pleasing  in 
human  nature,  as  there  is  in  animals,  the  horse  and 
the  dog,  is  nothing  to  the  purpose.  To  say,  that  there 
are  semblances  of  goodness  in  men,  is  worse  than  say- 
ing nothing  to  the  purpose.  It  is  gravely  putting  for- 
ward an  argument  which  can  answer  no  end  but  that 
of  self-deception.  And,  if  we  are  so  deceived,  we 
ought  to  reform  our  language ;  w^e  ought  not  to  say 
that  these  semblances  are  excellent  and  lovely  ;  we 
ought  to  suspect,  and  dread,  and  dislike  them  more 
than  open  vices ;  for  they  are  more  dangerous ;  they 
beguile  us  of  all  moral  discrimination ;  they  corrupt 
the  fountain  of  truth  in  us.  And,  indeed,  there  are 
semblances  of  good,  which  are  to  be  thus  regarded  ; 
but  the  evasion  we  are  considering,  instead  of  expos- 
ing, helps  to  shield  them.  If  the  Calvinist  only  main- 
tained that  the  mass  of  mankind  is  not  prevailingly, 
habitually  good,  there  would  be  no  controversy.  If 
he  only  said,  that  mankind  are  sadly  depraved,  that 
the  highest  principle  of  virtue,  the  fixed  love  of  God, 
is  wanting  in  multitudes,  we  should  have  no  dispute 
with  him.  But  he  says  that  there  is  nothing  good ; 
not  any,  the  least  thing  that  is  pure  and  holy ;  noth- 
ing, that  by  any  addition  or  increase,  can  become  holi- 
ness ;  not  one  solitary,  momentary  breathing  of  real 
virtue,  ever  to  be  found  in  human  nature.  Now,  for 
Calvinists  to  admit  that  there  is  nevertheless  something 
pleasing,  grateful,  charming  in  human  nature  is  all 
32 


374  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

mockery.  It  is  nothing  to  the  purpose.  We  might 
as  well  be  told  that  the  human  form  is  sometimes 
beautiful,  the  countenance  lovely,  the  movement  grace- 
ful. It  is  nothing  to  the  purpose.  The  question  now 
is,  not  a  question  of  taste,  but  of  theology.  It  is  a 
question  about  the  object,  not  of  the  imagination,  but 
of  the  conscience,  the  moral  nature.  When  men  ad  - 
mire,  praise,  love  the  virtues  of  others,  they  suppose 
they  admire,  praise,  love  what  is  really,  morally  ex- 
cellent. Do  they  so  ?  Calvinism  avers  that  they  do 
not.  If  it  admitted  that  there  was  any  thing  morally 
pure  and  good  in  what  men  love,  that  there  was  iu 
human  nature  the  least  possible  degree  of  what  is 
pleasing  to  God  and  conformable  to  his  law,  the  very 
basis  of  Calvinism  would  be  taken  away,  and  all  its 
superstructure  would  fall  to  the  ground.  But  it  denies 
this,  and  therefore,  we  repeat,  it  stands  confronted  with 
the  judgment  of  the  whole  world. 

We  return  to  this  point,  for  we  wish  that  this  posi- 
tion of  the  system  may  be  understood ;  we  think  it 
will  be  found  to  yield  us  some  inference. 

This,  then,  is  the  position  of  the  system  and  of  its 
defenders.  A  few  persons,  a  few  individuals  in  a  com- 
munity, a  few  thousands  in  the  world,  declare,  that 
all  the  rest  are  totally  depraved,  that  there  is  no  foun- 
dation in  their  nature  for  a  system  of  moral  philosophy ; 
no  truth  in  the  moral  part  of  their  literature  ;  nothing 
but  error  in  their  conversation,  so  far  as  it  touches  the 
moral  qualities  of  those  around  them.  All  the  rest  of 
the  world  denies  it ;  not  in  form,  perhaps,  but  in  fact 
denies  it.  That  is  to  say,  they  speak  about  virtue, 
right,  goodness,  as  realities,  and  not  fictions  and  delu- 
sions. They  say  habitually,  and  they  say  it  not  of 
a  few  elected  persons,  but  of  many  beside  them,  "such 
men  are  good  men,  such  actions  are  right,  such  quali- 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  375 

ties  are  excellent  and  lovely."  "No,"  say  the  few; 
"  these  things  are  not  good,  nor  right,  nor  excellent." 
And  when  they  say  this  they  oppose  the  judgment  of 
the  whole  human  race !  Ask  any  man,  whether  he 
does  not  love  a  kind  action,  or  a  merciful  deed  ;  whether 
his  feelings  do  not  sometimes  kindle  at  the  thought  of 
a  generous  benefactor,  of  an  excellent  parent,  of  a  good 
and  worthy  man ;  and  he  will,  with  all  his  heart,  an- 
swer that  they  do.  He  would  think  himself  a  brute 
and  a  monster,  if  they  did  not.  In  fact,  the  language, 
the  literature — we  repeat — the  poetry,  the  history  of 
all  the  world,  is  full  of  testimonies  to  the  beauty  of 
goodness.  "  Nevertheless,"  say  the  few,  "  there  is  no 
real  love  of  goodness  in  the  world  ;  none  but  in  the 
hearts  of  the  regenerate.  With  the  exception  of  what 
is  good  in  them,  there  is  no  real  goodness  in  the  world. 
What  men  call  goodness,  is  not  goodness ;  and  if  it 
were,  they  would  not  love,  but  hate  it.  God,  the  infi- 
nitely good  and  kind  Being,  they  perfectly  hate." 
And  when  the  few  say  this,  we  repeat,  they  set  them- 
selves against  the  judgment  of  the  whole  world  ! 

It  is  not  strange  then,  that  Calvinism  should  find  it 
difficult  to  sustain  itself  in  the  pubhc  mind.  It  is  not 
strange  that  its  tenets,  according  to  the  experience  and 
confession  of  all  its  advocates,  should  show  a  tendency, 
the  moment  they  are  let  alone  and  left  to  themselves, 
to  sink  down,  out  of  the  public  mind,  and  to  be  lost 
in  the  mass  of  opinions,  so  actively  conflicting  with 
them.  This  tendency  is  well  understood,  and  univer- 
sally acknowledged.  There  never  was  a  city,  nor  vil- 
lage, nor  hamlet  in  the  world,  where  this  system  has 
been  preached,  that  it  did  not  sooner  or  later  array 
against  itself  an  intelligent  opposition.  And  there 
never  was  a  congregation  on  earth,  where  this  system 
has  once  been  preached,  and  has,  at  length,  ceased  to 


376  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

be  urg-ed,  so  that  men's  minds  were  left  to  take  the 
natural  course  of  human  opinion,  that  they  did  not 
give  up,  one  after  another,  every  point  of  it. 

Nor,  in  taking  the  popular  side  in  this  controversy, 
do  we  wish  to  say  any  thing,  to  catch  the  popular  ear, 
or  to  flatter  the  popular  passions  and  prejudices.  We 
admit,  we  more  than  admit,  we  insist,  that  there  is 
much,  very  much,  that  is  wrong  in  the  world ;  tnore 
that  is  wrong  than  right,  more  that  is  evil  than  good. 
We  are  sensible,  that  there  is  much  that  is  wrong  in 
the  history  and  current  literature  and  moral  philoso- 
phy of  the  world.  They  do  not  conform  sufficiently 
to  the  spirit  of  that  better  Teacher,  to  whom  it  is  our 
privilege  and  happiness  to  listen.  We  are  quite  aware, 
that  there  is  much  in  the  prevailing  moral  sentiments 
of  mankind  that  needs  to  be  reformed.  We  need  not 
to  be  told,  that  there  is  error  and  evil  and  blindness  in 
the  minds  of  all  human  beings.  We  can  go  far  with 
the  Calvinists  in  delineations  of  this  nature.  But  there 
is  a  point  at  which  we  must  stop.  We  cannot  admit 
that  there  is  nothing  good  in  human  nature,  no  first 
principle  to  be  built  upon,  no  spark  to  be  kindled  ;  no 
foundation  for  moral  philosophy,  no  foundation  for 
moral  hope. 

But  the  point  where  definition  and  acquiescence 
stop,  would  properly  be  the  beginning  of  argument. 
And  we  must  beg  our  readers  to  give  us  a  little  atten- 
tion, if  not  to  argument  at  length,  to  a  statement  of 
what  we  conceive  the  argument  on  this  subject  would 
be.  What  then  is  rectitude,  holiness,  or  virtue  ?  (the 
name  of  the  quality  is  immaterial,) — What  is  its  origin? 
— What  makes  it  to  be  to  us  the  quality  that  it  is  ? 

This,  as  we  have  already  intimated,  is  the  material 
question.  For  it  is  only  by  setting  up  a  peculiar  de- 
finition of  religion  or  rectitude,  and  then  maintaining 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY. 


377 


that  this  pecuUar  quality  is  the  product  of  a  special 
divine  influence,  that  they  are  able  to  deny  the  posses- 
sion of  every,  the  least  degree  of  rectitude  to  the  rest 
of  mankind.  From  the  same  source,  too,  springs  all 
exclusion,  alienation,  division. 

What,  then,  is  moral  rectitude?  We  suppose  that 
if  we  were  to  write  down  for  answer,  the  words— "jus- 
tice, love,  pity,  disinterestedness,  holiness,  piety,  virtue" 
—the  justness  of  the  reply  would  be  indisputable.  But 
what  do  these  words  mean  ?  The  answer  is,  that  the 
universal  human  conscience  must  interpret  their  mean- 
ins;.  The  idea  of  rectitude  cannot  be  defined  but  by 
using  these  or  the  like  words.  That  is  to  say,  strictly 
speaking,  it  cannot  be  defined  at  all.  Reference  must 
be  made  simply  to  the  human  heart.  And  if  it  be 
asked,  again,  what  gives  birth  to  this  idea  of  rectitude 
or  holiness,  the  answer  must  be,  it  is  the  constitution 
of  our  nature  ;  it  is  God.  This,  in  substance,  is  the 
whole  amount  of  all  that  we  know  about  rectitude  ;  of 
all  that  any  body  knows  about  it ;  and  it  proves,  be- 
yond all  doubt,  that  the  Galvinistic  assumption  is  for- 
bidden by  the  universal  conscience  and  conviction. 

To  illustrate  this,  suppose  a  class  of  theorists  were 
to  arise,  and  to  call  in  question  all  the  received  ideas 
of  philosophy,  science  and  taste.  Suppose  they  should 
say,  "  We  have  another  idea  of  truth,  of  nature,  of 
beauty;  we  repudiate  and  reject  not  only  all  your 
theories,  but  all  your  fundamental  ideas  on  these  sub- 
jects." What  would  be  the  answer.  "  You  cannot ;" 
all  men  would  say— " you  cannot;  unless  you  main- 
tain that  the  universal  human  reason  is  irrational ;  and 
that  all  received  truth  is  falsehood.  You  cannot,  un- 
less you  claim  an  illumination  from  heaven  in  matters 
of  philosophy,  science  and  taste,  that  distinguishes  you 
from  all  other  men.  And  if  you  do,  we  know  of  no 
32* 


378  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

clearer  definition  oi fanaticism  than  your  opinion  pre- 
sents." 

In  fact,  if  any  one  will  tell  us  why  certain  melodies, 
colours  and  forms,  or  why  certain  axioms  and  "  first 
truths"  are  agreeable  to  us  ;  we  will  tell  him  why  cer- 
tain moral  qualities  are  so.  The  only  answer  is  that 
our  nature  is  constituted  to  find  them  so.  It  is  so  ; 
and  that  is  all  we  know — all  we  can  say  about  it. 
Philosophy  has  been  always  asking  for  this  ichy  ;  but 
it  is  in  vain.  We  once  thought  ourselves,  that  we  had 
pushed  definition  to  its  ultimate  point,  and  come  to  the 
truth  in  its  last  analysis,  by  saying  that  the  primary 
idea  of  rectitude  is  love,  benevolence,  the  desire  of 
pronioti7ig  happiness  ;  but  we  see  that  even  this  fails. 
Thus  we  had  construed  the  declaration  that  "  God  is 
love ;"  and  we  had  said, — this  embraces  all ;  this 
sounds  the  depths  of  all  rectitude.  But  suppose  that 
God  were  a  being  who  had  created  a  universe  of  mere 
animal,  of  mere  insect  happiness ;  and  would  this 
satisfy  our  idea  of  his  perfection  ?  No  ;  this  would  be 
mere  sympathy  with  mere  happiness  ;  and  the  noblest 
idea  would  be  left  out.  That  is  the  moral  idea,  the 
idea  of  rectitude  ;  and  for  the  understanding  of  this, 
we  can  appeal  to  no  definition,  to  no  reasoning,  but 
only  to  the  constitution  of  our  nature. 

It  is  in  this  attempt  at  definition  that  all  the  moral 
theories  have  failed  :  and  yet  it  is  well  worth  observing 
how  they  have  all  involved  this  idea,  though  they  have 
been  seeking  something  else.  Let  us  look  at  them  a 
moment  in  this  view. 

One  preliminary  observation  will  be  found  of  special 
importance  here.  It  may  have  been  observed  by  the 
reader,  that  we  have  been  careful  to  speak  of  nothing 
but  the  feeling,  the  sentiment  of  rectitude,  as  it  exists 
in  the  mind.     Now  the  observation  is,  that  in  this 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  379 

inquiry,  it  is  the  feeling  or  perception  alone  with  which 
we  have  anything  to  do  ;  that  we  have  nothing  to  do 
with  the  external  action.  The  outward  action  is  no- 
thing but  the  sign  of  the  inward  perception.  It  is,  we 
repeat,  with  the  perception  only  that  we  have  anything 
to  do,  when  inquiring  after  the  real  origin  and  essen- 
tial nature  of  virtue.  If  this  distinction  had  been  suf- 
ciently  considered,  it  would  have  cut  off,  as  we  think, 
many  a  wearisome  and  wordy  disquisition  upon  the 
grounds  of  morality. 

But  to  the  definitions  and  grounds  of  morality. 
Aristotle's  definition,  that  virtue  is  the  inean  beticeen 
extremes^  can  scarcely  be  considered  as  rising  to  the 
dignity  of  a  theory.  It  was  a  just  maxim  certainly, 
and  implied,  we  may  add,  that  the  elementary  princi- 
ples of  rectitude  lay  in  the  human  heart,  though  they 
were  liable  continually  to  fall  into  one  or  the  other  of 
the  extremes  of  apathy  and  passion,  of  inaction  or  vio- 
lence. Zeno's  rule  of  livirtg  according  to  7iature, 
that  is,  the  nature  of  the  soul,  implied  of  course,  that 
there  is  a  principle  or  perception  of  rectitude  in  the 
soul,  which  is  the  teacher  of  virtue.  The  doctrine  of 
Epicurus,  that  happiness  is  the  end  of  our  being,  and 
that  all  virtue  lies  in  the  pursuit  of  happiness^  was 
connected  by  this  philosopher  with  the  admission,  that, 
in  order  to  obtain  this  happiness,  one  must  live  virtu- 
ously ;  an  admission  that  at  once  introduces  a  new 
element  into  his  theory,  an  element  fatal  to  his  theory 
as  a  theory,  but  the  very  element  we  contend  for, — 
that  is  to  sa}^,  an  independent  perception  of  virtue. 
The  fitness  of  things  of  Cudworth,  Clarke,  and  Price 
taught,  that  "  the  right  and  wrong  of  actions  are  to  be 
regarded  as  ranking  amongst  necessary  or  first  truths, 
which  are  discerned  by  the  mind  independently  of  all 
reasoning  and  evidence."     The  speculations  of  those 


380  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

acute  theologians,  Avhich  threw  a  world  of  learned  dust 
and  scholastic  mist  over  this  first  truth,  still  laid  this 
truth  in  the  heart  of  their  system  ;  namely,  that  right 
and  wrong  are  things  self-evident,  necessary,  and  im- 
mutable as  the  axioms  of  the  Mathematics.  The 
celebrated  "  theory  of  moral  sentiments "  by  Adam 
Smith,  the  theory  of  moral  sympathies  that  is  to  say, 
involved  the  same  original  and  independent  principle. 
"  I  do  wrong.  I  consider  others  as  looking  upon  that 
wrong  action  and  condemning  it.  I  sympathize  with 
their  disapprobation  ;  and  thus  I  condemn  myself.  I 
do  right ;  and  through  a  similar  process  I  learn  to 
approve  myself.  It  is  sympathy,"  says  the  theory,  in 
both  cases.  But  why  do  we  feel  so  differently  in  the 
different  cases  ?  Why  does  the  right  excite  one  kind 
of  emotion,  and  the  wrong  another  ?  Why  did  they, 
in  the  bosoms  of  the  first  men  that  experienced  these 
emotions  ?  The  theory  does  not  tell  us.  And  the 
only  answer  is,  that  it  is  the  constitution  of  our  nature 
that  makes  the  difference.  In  the  same  manner  do 
we  think  that  there  is  involved  in  the  Utilitarian  theory 
a  secret  reason  and  ground  of  morals,  which  the  Utili- 
tarian himself  does  not  recognize.  Why  is  an  action 
right?  Because  it  tends  to  promote  the  general  hap- 
piness. But  why  is  it  right  to  promote  the  general 
happiness?  Is  it  because  happiness  is  a  good?  Yes, 
it  is  a  good  ;  but  if  bare  tendency  to  promote  this  good, 
is  the  only  thing  to  be  considered,  then  a  shower  of 
rain  must  be  a  very  virtuous  thing.  "  No,"  it  will  be 
replied,  "  a  being  only  can  be  virtuous.  There  must 
be  an  intent  to  do  good  ;  a  moral  intent, — not  an  in- 
tellectual contriving  of  the  matter  only ;  a  love, — and 
not  a  love  of  happiness  merely,  our  own,  for  instance, 
but  a  love  of  others'  happiness."  Here  then,  we  think, 
is  a  secret  truth  embraced,  but  not  recognized,  in  the 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY. 


38t 


Utilitarian's  category.  A  world  of  beings  may  easily 
be  conceived  of,  promoting  each  others'  happiness  in 
the  highest  degree,  and  yet  having  no  such  moral 
intent,  not  virtuous.     The  world  of  animals  is  such  a 

world.* 

If  we  have  succeeded  in  establishing  the  position, 
that  the  ideas  of  moral  excellence  are  constitutional 
and  belong  essentially  to  human  nature,  we  are  pre- 
pared to  advance  another  step  in  our  survey  of  the 
ethics  of  Calvinism.  For  we  maintain,  that  the  idea 
of  rectitude  implies,  in  however  small  a  degree,  the 
feeling  of  rectitude,  f  The  Calvinist,  indeed,  admits 
that  there  is  a  conscience  in  all  men,  and  we  maintain 
that   this  admission  is  inconsistent  with  the  alleged 

*  We  are  not  sure  that  the  theory  of  utility  is  yet  set  forth  and 
defended  in  a  manner  that  is  very  satisfactory  to  its  most  intelligent 
defenders      We  have  supposed  that  the  theory,  as  laid  down  in  the 
books,  contented  itself  with  saying,  that  an  action  is  right  because  it 
tends  to  promote  happiness,  and  there  left  the  subject  without  going 
back  to  the  ulterior  and  ultimate  ground  of  rectitude  in  the  case. 
There  it  seems  to  us  to  be  left  by  Paley  and  Bentham.     They  do 
not  seem  to  have  considered  the  question,  why  the/ee/zn^  of  bene- 
volence is  right.     If,  however,  the  Utilitarian  should  say,  that  he 
assumes  the  feeling  to  be  right,  and  only  differs  from  us  in  analyz- 
ing and  resolving  all  virtue  into  that  feeling,  we  should  have  no 
qulrrel  with  the  principle  of  his  philosophy,  though  we  should 
doubt  about  his  conclusion.     Whether  all  rectitude  can  be  ana  yzed 
into  benevolence,  we  doubt      But  if  the  Utilitarian  says,  that  a 
benevolent  feeling  is  right  because  it  tends  to  promote  happiness, 
if  he  says  that  happiness  is  so  excellent  a  thing  that  it  confers  upon 
its  promoter,  virtue,  all  the  charm  which  invests  it,  we  must  dissent 
alto-ether.     Benevolence  makes  me  happy,  makes  others  happy. 
Is  that  the  reason  why  it  is  beautiful  ?     It  would  be,  to  sell  virtue 
in  the  market-place  !     Happiness  is  an  excellent  thing.     But  it  is 
not  half  so  excellent  a  thing  as  virtue.     Yet  this  theory  would  make 
happiness  the  nobler  thing,  since  it  is  offered  as  the  very  ground  and 
reason,  whv  the  virtue  that  promotes  it  is  excellent.     We  can  aa- 
mire  the  m;rciful  man.  when  he  is  merciful  to  hie  beast,  when  he 
takes  care  only  for  the  happiness  of  animals  ;  but  can  animal  happi- 
ness confer  upon  the  quality  of  mercy  all  its  beauty  and  worth  . 


382  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

universal  and  total  depravity  of  men.  )  We  expect 
that,  in  answer  to  this,  it  will  be  said,  at  once,  that 
although  all  men  have  a  conscience  and  approve  of 
what  is  good,  that  is  a  very  different  thing  from  loving  it. 

Undoubtedly  it  is  a  very  different  thing  from  loving 
it  habitually,  or  with  predominant  affection.  But  the 
question  is,  whether  the  approbation  of  goodness  does 
not  imply  the  previous  existence,  not  of  a  habit,  but  of 
a  feeling  of  goodness.  You  behold  a  man  doing  a 
good  action.  Now,  it  is  not  the  bare  outward  action 
that  you  admire,  the  stretching  out  of  the  hand,  and 
that  hand  filled  with  gold  ;  but  it  is  the  generous  feel- 
ing, the  feeling  of  kindness  or  pity  in  the  heart  of  the 
giver.  And  how  could  you  know  any  thing  of  this 
feeling  in  his  heart,  unless  you  had  experienced  some- 
thing of  it  in  your  own  heart  ?  We  do  not  see  how 
otherwise  you  could  know  it.  The  feeling  is  not 
visible.  You  do  not  with  your  bodily  eyes  see  it. 
But  you  know  that  it  is  in  your  neighbour's  heart, 
when  he  is  sincerely  doing  a  kind  action  ;  and  you 
know  it  from  sympathy  ;  you  know  it  because  you 
feel  with  him,  or  have,  at  some  former  time,  felt  as  he 
does.  In  short,  you  know  nothing,  and  can  know 
nothing,  about  any  mental  qualities  and  exercises,  but 
by  experience  of  them.  And  as  you  know  what 
memory  is  only  by  remembering,  or  what  reason  is 
only  by  reasoning,  so  do  you  know  what  a  virtuous  or 
holy  exercise  in  the  mind  is,  only  by  feeling  it. 

Conscience  is  not  only  a  judgment,  but  it  is  a  feel- 
ing. It  is  the  same  soul  acting,  with  greater  or  less 
energy,  upon  moral  objects.  The  difference  between 
conscience  (as  that  word  is  commonly  used)  and  moral 
feehng,  is  a  difference,  not  in  kind  but  in  degree.  It 
may  be  a  cold  approbation  ;  it  may  be  a  warm  emo- 
tion ;  but  still  it  is  the  same  thing.     We  perceive  the 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  383 

difference  between  right  and  wrong.  We  feel  the 
difference  bet^veen  right  and  wrong.  Here  is  the 
same  thing.  We  feel  this  more  or  less  strongly.  Here 
is  all  the  difference.  When  we  witness  a  simple  act 
of  justice,  as  the  paying  of  a  debt,  we  simply  approve  it. 
When  we  witness  an  act  of  great,  generous,  and  even 
self-denying  benevolence,  we  warmly  approve  it.  In 
both  cases,  it  is,  in  its  nature,  the  same  action  of  the 
soul,  put  forth  with  greater  or  less  energy. 

But,  it  may  be  said,  are  not  conscience  and  feeling 
often  directly  opposed  to  each  other?  May  not  the 
conscience  be  right  when  the  feeling  is  wrong  ?  Is 
not  this  especially  the  case  in  envy  ?  A  man  approves, 
it  will  be  said,  the  excellence  that  he  hates ;  his  con- 
science perceives  a  virtue,  to  which  his  heart  is  opposed. 
Undoubtedly  the  feeling  of  conscience  may  be  over- 
borne by  other  feelings  ;  but  this  does  not  prove  it  to 
be  any  the  less  a  feeling,  and,  so  far  as  it  goes,  a  right 
feeling.  There  is  no  difficulty  here.  It  is  just  as 
filial  affection  may  be  overborne  by  the  love  of  worldly 
pleasure,  or  evil  company.  All  we  say,  in  this  case,  is, 
that  the  filial  affection  is  the  weaker  feeling.  And,  if 
this  feeling  should  strengthen  and  gain  the  predomin- 
ance, we  should  not  say,  that  it  was  changed  in  its 
nature,  but  only,  that  it  was  increased  in  power.  And 
so  the  weak  conscience,  when  it  becomes  a  strong 
principle,  when  it  becomes  the  habitual  love  of  God 
and  good  beings,  is  yet  the  same  conscience  increased 
in  vigour.  It  has  passed  through  a  change,  not  of  nature 
but  of  degree.  It  is  the  same  single,  solemn  homage 
of  human  nature  to  what  is  right  and  good. 

And  let  me  add,  that  the  perception  of  moral  recti- 
tude needs  to  be  something  thus  simple,  clear,  and 
unquestionable.  It  must  not  be  dependent  on  any 
abstruse  reasoning.     It  must  not  depend  on  this  or 


384  ON   THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

that  man's  peculiar  theory.  It  must  not  require  that 
men  should  ascend  into  heaven,  or  go  beyond  the  sea, 
to  find  it  out.  It  must  not  leave  any  one  cause  to 
inquire  anxiously,  "  wherewith  he  shall  come  before 
the  Lord."  It  is  too  essential  a  matter,  it  is  too  vital 
an  interest,  to  be  the  subject  of  any  reasonable  doubt 
as  to  lohat  it  is.  It  must  be  hke  the  light  of  the  sun, 
shed  clearly  and  brightly  upon  every  human  eye. 
That  which  is  food  to  the  soul,  must  be  certain  to  the 
taste.  That  which  is  life  to  the  soul,  must  be  manifest 
to  simple  consciousness.  That  in  which  all  safety,  all 
good,  all  happiness  essentially  consists,  must  be  self- 
evident,  indisputable,  universal  truth ;  truth  without  a 
shadow,  without  a  question,  without  the  possibility  of 
a  mistake. 

We  should  be  glad  if  we  had  space,  now  to  consider 
the  bearing  of  this  discussion  upon  several  subjects  : 
upon  the  identity  of  true  morality  and  true  religion  ; 
upon  the  way  of  becoming  good  and  religious,  or  what 
it  is  to  become  so  ;  upon  the  unreasonableness  of  intol- 
erance ;  and  upon  the  light  in  which  the  guidance  of 
Scripture  is  to  be  regarded.  But  we  must  hope  that 
the  application  to  these  topics,  of  what  we  have  been 
saying,  is  sufficiently  obvious ;  and  Ave  Avill  close  our 
objections  to  Calvinism  by  asking  one  question.  What 
sort  of  practical  ethics  would  follow  from  this  system  ? 
What  sort  of  position,  theoretically  speaking,  would  its 
votary  occupy  in  life,  in  society,  in  the  world  ? 

Himself  pure,  while  the  multitude  around  him  is 
totally  depraved  ;  himself  growing  better  while  they 
are  daily  growing  worse  ;  himself  elected,  sanctified, 
redeemed,  while,  for  them,  no  electing  mercy,  no  sanc- 
tifying spirit,  no  redeeming  blood  has  yet  interposed  to 
bring  them  into  the  fold  of  safety  ;  himself  hoping  for 
heaven,  while  they,  dying  such  as  they  live,  are  cer- 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  385 

tainly  doomed  to  hell,  nay,  are  every  year  and  day, 
sinking  by  thousands,  from  the  fair  and  smiUng  abodes 
of  life,  into  everlasting  burnings  ;  what  manner  of  man 
ought  he  to  be  ?  We  do  not  ask  what  ideas  of  God 
must  result  from  this  view  of  the  mass  of  mankind  as 
a  body  of  unreclaimed  and  almost  irreclaimable  con- 
victs, from  this  view  of  the  earth  as  a  vast  penitentiary  ; 
but  we  ask,  what  sort  of  person  should  he  be,  who 
dwells  in  such  a  penitentiary  ? 

Certainly,  he  should  be  filled  with  inexpressible  sad- 
ness. He  may  rejoice  in  his  own  escape  ;  but,  for  the 
thousands  and  millions,  who  never  have  escaped,  and 
who  never  shall  escape,  he  ought  to  feel  a  sadness, 
amounting  to  gloom  and  horror.  If  he  lived  in  a  city 
of  a  million  of  inhabitants,  and  knew  that  they  were 
all,  in  one  season,  to  be  swept  away  by  a  pestilence  ; 
that  all  were  to  die,  excepting  a  remnant  of  a  few  hun- 
dreds wdth  himself,  could  he,  contemplating  only  that 
death  and  temporal  desolation  ;  could  he  walk  cheer- 
fully in  the  streets  of  that  city  ?  But  what  is  this  to 
that  doom,  beneath  which  millions  of  the  human  race 
are,  every  year,  sinking  to  woes  and  agonies,  untold, 
unutterable,  and  never  to  end  !  Can  joy  be  any  part 
of  a  system  like  this  ?  Can  a  man  ever  smile,  who 
has  taken  this  contemplation  of  things  to  his  heart  ? 
Can  he  see  any  real  sign  of  cheerfulness  in  the  heavens 
or  the  earth?  Can  the  song  of  the  neighbouring 
groves,  can  the  shouts  of  laughter  from  yonder  play- 
ground, or  the  swelling  of  gay  and  glad  music  upon 
the  breeze,  be  any  thing  but  the  most  bitter  mockery  ? 
What  are  all  these,  to  the  mass  of  mankind,  but  the 
prelude  to  groans,  and  lamentations,  and  wailings  of 
sorrow  ?  The  very  arts,  under  such  a  system,  should 
lose  all  their  forms  of  winning  beauty  and  imposing 
grandeur,  all  their  buoyancy  and  brightness ;  and 
33 


386  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS    OF 

sculpture  should  only  present  us  'groups,  like  the  Lao- 
coon,  writhing  in  the  agony  of  fear;  and  painting 
should  only  draw  pictures,  dark  and  portentous,  like 
that  of  the  Deluge  ;  and  poetry  should  only  pour  out, 
in  sadder  numbers  than  the  celebrated  "  Night 
Thoughts,"  its  tears  and  lamentations  over  the  mourn- 
ful fate  of  human  kind.  Under  the  dread  shadow  of 
this  system,  then,  what  can  remain  to  its  consistent 
votary  ?  What  can  be  his  ties  to  society  at  large  ? 
Can  he  have  friendship  7  Can  he  wish  for  intercourse 
with  unregenerate  men,  bad  men,  utterly  bad  men  ? 
Why  should  he  ?  What  is  there  in  them  to  love  ? 
If  he  must  be  connected  with  them,  by  business  or 
kindred,  yet  what  are  these  circumstances^  compared 
with  the  great  features  of  moral  relationship  ?  And 
the  moral  relationship  on  the  part  of  the  regenerate, 
can  be  nothing  but  that  of  superiority,  and  pity,  and 
prayer  ;  not  that  of  friendship. 

Can  human  nature, — can  human  life, — can  human 
society,  bear  such  a  system  as  this  ?  Biuthened  in 
spirit,  saddened  with  many  afflictions,  struggling  with 
many  difficulties,  scarcely  sustaining  itself  with  all 
the  aids  of  the  most  cheering  faith,  how  must  the  hu- 
man heart  sink  under  this  universal  cloud  of  darkness, 
horror  and  despair !  How  could  any  liberal  acquisi- 
/  tions,  any  graceful  accomplishments,  any  joyous  vir- 
1  tues,  or  generous  confidences,  spring  up  vmder  such  an 
Appalling,  all-absorbing  dispensation  of  threatening, 
iwrath  and  woe  ?  It  has  been  said,  we  know,  with  an 
air  of  much  self-complacency,  that  our  anti-Calvinistic 
system,  that  Unitarianism,  in  other  words,  is  essen- 
tially a  shallow,  superficial  system  even  for  the  intel- 
lect ;  that  it  is  a  system,  altogether  imfavourable  to  a 
generous  and  thorough  improvement ;  that  genius  en- 
compassed  by   that   system,   wallts   in   fetters.     But 


MORAL    PHILOSOPHY.  387 

what,  we  should  Hke  to  ask,  has  Calvinism  done,  that 
its  defenders  should  be  entitled  to  adopt  this  tone  of 
contempt  for  its  adversaries  ?  We  ask  not,  what  Cal- 
vifiists  have  done.  For,  allowing  individuals  among 
them  all  deserved  credit  for  genius  and  accomplish- 
ments,fit  is  very  remarkable,  that  in  the  exertion  of 
their  powers  in  the  chosen  departments  of  genius,  they 
have  proved  traitors  to  their  system  !  y  That  is  to  say, 
the  tone  of  religious  thought  and  sentiment  introduced 
into  such  works  has  never  been  that  of  Calvinism. 
We  ask,  then,  What  has  Calvinism  done  ?  What  lit- 
erature has  ever  breathed  its  spirit,  or  ever  will?  What 
poem  has  it  written — but  Mr.  Pollok's  "Course  of 
Time?"  Whatphilosophy— but  Dr.  Wardlaw's?  Into 
what  meditations  of  genius  or  reveries  of  imagination, 
but  those  of  John  Bunyan,  has  it  ever  breathed  its 
soul? 

We  say  not  this  reproachfully,  but  in  self-defence. 
But  we  do  say,  that  a  system,  which  has  never  ap- 
peared in  any  recognized  delineations  of  the  true  and 
beautiful ;  which  never  comes  into  that  department 
even  with  those  who  profess  to  hold  it  in  theory  ;  which  ^ 
dwells  not  with  men  in  their  happy  hours,  by  their 
jfiresides,  and  among  their  children ;  which  wears  no 
form  of  beauty  that  ever  art  or  imagination  devised,  \ 
but  hangs,  rather,  as  a  dark  and  antiquated  hatchment 
on  the  wall,  the  emblem  of  life  passed  away ;  and  we 
do  say,  too,  that  a  system  whose  frowning  features  the 
world  cannot  and  will  not  endure ;  whose  theoretical 
inhumanity  and  inhospitality  few  of  its  advocates  can 
ever  learn  ;  whose  tenets  are  not,  as  all  tenets  should 
be,  better,  but  worse,  a  thousand  times  worse,  than  the 
men  who  embrace  them  ;  whose  principles  falsify  all 
history  and  all  experience,  and  throw  dishonour  upon 
all  earthly  heroism  and  magnanimity  ;  whose  teach- 


388  ON    THE    CALVINISTIC    VIEWS,  ETC. 

ings  warrant  no  hopes,  comfort  nor  afflictions,  soothe 
no  sorrows,  but  of  an  elected  few  ;  and  whose  dread 
messages  ought  to  make  the  sympathies  of  those  few 
to  be  tortures  and  agonies  to  them,  while  they  bind  in 
chains  the  rest  of  mankind,  and  hold  them  reserved 
for  blackness  and  darkness  for  ever ;  we  do  say  that 
such  a  system  cannot  be  true  !  It  may  be  a  sort  of 
theory  to  be  speculated  about,  to  be  coldly  believed  in, 
but  it  is  not  truth,  that  can  be  taken  home  to  the  heart. 
"  Coldly  believed  in," — did  we  say.  No ;  so  believed, 
it  is  not  believed  in  at  all.  It  is  not  believed,  unless 
it  is  beheved  in  horror  and  anguish ;  unless  it  sends 
its  votary  to  his  nightly  pillow  in  tears,  and  wakes 
him  every  morning  to  sorrow,  and  carries  him  through 
every  day,  burthened  as  with  a  world's  calamity,  and 
hurries  him,  worn  out  with  apprehension  and  pity,  to 
a  premature  grave !  He  who  should  grow  sleek  and 
fat,  and  look  fair  and  bright,  in  a  prison,  from  which 
his  companions  were  taken  one  by  one,  day  by  day,  to 
the  scaffold  and  the  gibbet,  could  make  a  far,  far  better 
plea  for  himself,  than  a  good  man  living  and  thriving 
in  this  dungeon- world,  and  believing  that  thousands 
and  thousands  of  his  fellow  prisoners,  are  dropping 
daily  into  everlasting  burnings.  Once  more  then,  we 
say,  that  this  system  cannot  be  proved  to  be  true,  till 
nature  and  life  and  consciousness  are  all  proved  to  be 
false;  till  the  ties  of  affection  are  proved  to  be  all 
snares,  and  its  sympathies  all  sorrows  ;  till  the  tenor 
of  life  is  proved  to  be  a  tissue  of  hes,  and  the  benefi- 
cence of  nature  all  mockery,  and  the  dictates  of  hu- 
manity all  dreams  and  delusions  ! 


^* 


Princeton   Theological   Seminary   Libraries 


1    1012  01195  0344 


